Why Vote?

[QUOTE=qualitycontrolrep]No seriously. what's the use? convince me and I'm in. but until then...[/QUOTE]
voting for president, very little point. voting for issues on the ballot, very good reason. you vote for/on issues is the deciding factor. your vote for president doesn't count in the sense that the president gets elected by the actual vote of the people.
voting on the issues gives you some chance of getting what you want done.

Why not vote? Is it really that hard? Are you really that fucking lazy that you can't decided what issues you support and what issues you don't. Is it that hard to spend a little time before an election and learn about the candidates. Even if you don't know everything you can at least vote things that directly affect you.

trypd, even though you don't like the system in which we elect our president the only way to change it is by voting for someone who wants to get rid of the electoral college. ie Ralph Nader.

[QUOTE=DrGonzoHST]Why not vote? Is it really that hard? Are you really that fucking lazy that you can't decided what issues you support and what issues you don't. Is it that hard to spend a little time before an election and learn about the candidates. Even if you don't know everything you can at least vote things that directly affect you.

trypd, even though you don't like the system in which we elect our president the only way to change it is by voting for someone who wants to get rid of the electoral college. ie Ralph Nader.[/QUOTE]

I knew I'd have to explain myself, but no I have to do it in a demeaning manner, but that's probably the most unintellectual response. And I should've known better. So you're proud to be an american. that doesn't mean your vote counts for shit. There's this thing. It's called the popular Vote, right. well....it doesn't count for SHIT. The electoral college doesn't have do go along with the popular vote and they don't have to give any reason. The popular vote is just to make people like you feel like thy're actually "making a difference" in this wonderful land of "democracy." The best, most obvious example is the ridiculous Bush/Gore election debacle. By the popular vote Gore OBVIOUSLY would become our next president...but he didn't. Because the electoral college voted differently. Your Vote for president is just a suggestion for a group of guys that already have there minds made up. The POPULAR VOTE is just to appease middle age men and women...and youngsters like yourself. Oh Look. you made a difference. your vote is listed somewhere in there on CNN. but that's about it. Until your vote for NADER actually COUNTS for shit, you won't be waving goodbye to the elctoral college. And That's exactly WHY THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE WON'T VOTE FOR HIM. and thier vote ACTUALLY counts.

Trypd. Thanks.You make a very good point. That's the ONLY reason I've ever considered voting. And I just might do that...Maybe. I knew you'd come through with an intelligent, logical answer.

The electoral college votes for who ever wins the majority in their state. Gore lost Florida by 537 votes thus all of Florida's Electoral Votes went to Bush.

The electors represent the people because our idiot forefathers didn't trust the people to vote for themselves, If an Elector ever voted for anyone other then who they were suppose to, the system would fail and then be destroyed, until that day we are stuck. The politicians on both sides are happy only competing with one side instead of multiple parties so they continue with the winner take all system knowing that only a democrat or republician can win.

The only way you can change the system is by not being discouraged and continuing to support other parties and continuing to VOTE. Your voice will not be heard unless you do. Maybe I'm just a crazy young idealist but I don't see how not voting is ever going to change anything. It won't change on it's own. It's a cancer and cancer doesn't go away on it's own. You might have to go through kemo to get rid of it.

And you know what a Nader vote did mean something in 2000. Do you think the Democrat party would have moved back to the left side if they didn't see how they lost 3 million votes because they were taking advantage of progressives like myself. There would be no Howard Dean without people like me. John Kerry would still be a piece of shit, mumbling about Vietnam without people like me. I don't care that Democrats have been blaming people like me for 2000 because they took us for granted, and they got what they deserved. And you know what if they don't get their act together they will lose 3 million people this time because they have done nothing in the past 4 years to earn that vote.

I'm curious to know why the electoral college was created in the first place.
Are the respective population weights reflected for all states ?

Seen from the outside there are a few things that make me wonder about the whole US presidential election thing :
- the primary circus
- only 2 major parties
- the choice of candidates people did not know a year before

Thanks for answering.

snuffy's notes on civil obedience:

why vote? serve on juries? if you don't, there are tons of idiots who will galdly take your place. Elected officials rely on the combination of your apathy and the ignorance or plain stupidity of the people who do vote. "the man," for lack of an original term, wants smart people to stay at home on election day. that way, the pool of people they have to win over becomes "dumbed down" and therefore easier to sway. both major parties want this in the long term, of course.

The electoral college and districting issues associated with it are very important issues, but voting is still by far the most important, and fundamental.

[QUOTE=DrGonzoHST]The electoral college votes for who ever wins the majority in their state. Gore lost Florida by 537 votes thus all of Florida's Electoral Votes went to Bush. [/QUOTE]
yes, in theory that is how it is [i]supposed[/i] to work.
think about this for a second. 1888, election of Cleveland vs Harrison. Cleveland won the popular vote, Harrison won the electoral vote. that shows blatently that popular vote doesn't count for anything. the electoral college works in theory, but really, if you want to say that everyone gets their voice heard in the presidential election, then you are falt out lying.
1824- Adams vs Jackson - Jackson won both electoral and popular vote, but didn't carry a majority of electoral votes. (i know, hard to understand, but it's true). the election process was circumvented by the house, and Adams was elected.
1876- Hayes vs Tilden - Tilden had majority of the popular vote, but lost by one electoral vote. again, hardly representative of popular choice.

those are 3 examples from our own history of electoral vote versus popular vote. examples of why the electoral college does not work. i'm not even going to bring up the same failure to acknowledge the popular vote in this previous election.

i vote when my vote does count. i do not bother with voting when it doesn't count. it's not a matter of "it's easy, just do it" it's a matter of standing up for my principals, i refuse to play into the propaganda that the government tries to lay on us as a people.

[QUOTE=trypdwyre]i vote when my vote does count. i do not bother with voting when it doesn't count. it's not a matter of "it's easy, just do it" it's a matter of standing up for my principals, i refuse to play into the propaganda that the government tries to lay on us as a people.[/QUOTE]

you made a lot of interesting points, but i'm confused at the end, are you saying that voting is part of the "propaganda?" if so, explain.

[QUOTE=franc tireur]I'm curious to know why the electoral college was created in the first place.
Are the respective population weights reflected for all states ?

Seen from the outside there are a few things that make me wonder about the whole US presidential election thing :
- the primary circus
- only 2 major parties
- the choice of candidates people did not know a year before

Thanks for answering.[/QUOTE]
franc, basically the electoral college was created for a few reasons, first, it gives extra power to the smaller states so in theory every state gets it's voice heard. also it was created as a buffer between the population and the presidential election. basically they were afraid that one person, a candidate, would be able to manipulate public opinion and come to power in that manner.
it's actually modeled after a system that was created in 1059 that was used to elect a pope. basically the electoral college is the politcal answer to the college of cardinals that is used to elect a pope. in america the electoral college has been around since the constitution. it's written in article II actually and "refined" by the 12th article of amendment.

as for the other 3 points you are wondering about, basically they all came about as a progression of events throughout our american history. the 2 major parties were developed basically because there are 2 major modes of thought politically, usually refered to as the right and the left. sure there are varying degress of these, but usually everyone in the right agrees on certain general ideas, and people of the left do the same. the independants have been trying for the past few elections to get their voice heard, but really, with most people taking a definate stance year after year, the independants end up numbering few enough to be properly heard.
candidates are chosen despite being known or not known. it's just a matter of political experiance, and few people in america bother to pay attention to senators and such unless they enter the race, or are their state's senator. they are things that many americans wonder about, but due to the natural progression of our own political history, these are things that are not likely to change anytime here soon.

[QUOTE=snuffy]you made a lot of interesting points, but i'm confused at the end, are you saying that voting is part of the "propaganda?" if so, explain.[/QUOTE]
i'm saying that when you hear commercials or read signs/fliers/what-have-you they all say that in voting your voice is heard, that you can directly influence who is elected to the presidency. that is propaganda as it is not true. we may indirectly influence who is elected to the presidency, but as i pointed out, that is not always the case.

oh. how do you improve the process by not voting?

[QUOTE=snuffy]oh. how do you improve the process by not voting?[/QUOTE]
how do you improve the process by voting for presidency?
actually i've taken up writting my congresspersons, i've started a few petitions and have spoke, in person with my state reps about the problem of the electoral college. unfortunately, there's not much we can do other than just wait for the next time someone tries to ammend the voting process. sadly the electoral college has faced down some 700 attempts at amending, so i don't know that my hopes are too high.
i do still vote on issues, and i vote in the primaries, usually one of the things i try to keep in mind when voting in the primaries is who supports my ideals better, and one of those major ones is the voting process. i want the popular vote to be heard. why let the people "choose" when the people's choice doesn't make much of a difference.
still i do vote, just not on the presidency.

It's the apathetic leftists who continue keep the right in power. If you [i]don't[/i] vote, your vote is cast [i]de facto[/i] in favor of the status quo.

[QUOTE=Tuffy the Dump Truck]It's the apathetic leftists who continue keep the right in power. If you [i]don't[/i] vote, your vote is cast [i]de facto[/i] in favor of the status quo.[/QUOTE]
i am aware. i am not apathetic, i just refuse to be subjected to a process that is not going to recognize my vote.
besides, my vote doesn't matter, status quo doesn't matter, what the electoral college votes for does matter.

Your argument isn't valid. The Electoral College does not get to choose who they vote for - they must cast their votes for the candidate with the majority of votes within their state. The problem with the Florida 2000 election was with the (Reagan/Bush-stacked) Supreme Court (unconstitutionally) halting the count of votes and declaring Bush the winner of that state.

[QUOTE=Tuffy the Dump Truck]Your argument isn't valid. The Electoral College does not get to choose who they vote for - they must cast their votes for the candidate with the majority of votes within their state. The problem with the Florida 2000 election was with the (Reagan/Bush-stacked) Supreme Court (unconstitutionally) halting the count of votes and declaring Bush the winner of that state.[/QUOTE]
yes, but that number does not accurately reflect the choice of the people. it subverts the overall choice of the people. my argument is that i am not going to be lead to think that my decision counts for other than providing a backdrop for the electoral college to select from.
until my vote does count for presidency, directly, i do not feel that supporting the system that i do not agree with is the proper way to go.

I still think the morons win if you don't vote.

[QUOTE=snuffy]I still think the morons win if you don't vote.[/QUOTE]
i already pointed out that even if you do vote, it doesn't mean that your vote is taken into consideration.

so the morons win wither way!!! alright alright you win. who want's a beer?

[QUOTE=snuffy]so the morons win wither way!!! alright alright you win. who want's a beer?[/QUOTE]
only if it's cold.

but seriously, the electoral college is antiquated. there is no need to protect the people from their own vote. candidates are still able to bluff their way through the campaign process, and whereas the electoral college does work once in a while, it should not be used to overthrow the popular vote.

way back in high school, i remember i was forced to argue IN SUPPORT of the electoral college for a graded debate in a history class. you guys would have absolutely laughed your ass off if you heard my argument. all about how the electoral college helps instill "trust in government." I wish i had a tape of that now. i decided that day that being a lawyer was a bad idea.

anyway, the electoral college is antiquated and just bizarre. I mean who are these people? Jeeze.

my heart still says it's better to vote most of the time, and if you decide not to, you better have a good reason. and some guy named bush better not be running.

[QUOTE=trypdwyre] i do not feel that supporting the system that i do not agree with is the proper way to go.[/QUOTE]

But what if you supported a candidate who didn't support the system? It's not the system you support when you vote it's the candidate.

[QUOTE=DrGonzoHST]But what if you supported a candidate who didn't support the system? It's not the system you support when you vote it's the candidate.[/QUOTE]
then it still wouldn't make a difference if i voted or not.
fact the fact, your vote doesn't count, 1824, 1876 and 1888 elections prove this fact.

If for no other reason, vote so that you can complain about those in power and the laws that are passed. Otherwise, I don't want to hear it.

That was four fucking years ago.

The problem with the left is there's lots of complaining and little action anymore.

Not voting is not going to help you, while voting may or may not help you.

By the way, the point of the electoral college is to make it so that all states have power, and so that even states conflicted in the election won't end up with fifty fifty of their vote going to each candidate, but instead all-or nothing. The popular vote in your state counts, and not voting is just fucking moronic.

Another issue. There isn't just conservative and liberal. There is also Libertarian and Authoritarian. Actually, people are much less polarized in conservative and liberal ways anymore, and are more effected in libertarian and authoritarian ways, hence an apparent, but misnamed swelling of moderates.

[QUOTE=Gideon]That was four fucking years ago.

The problem with the left is there's lots of complaining and little action anymore.

Not voting is not going to help you, while voting may or may not help you.

By the way, the point of the electoral college is to make it so that all states have power, and so that even states conflicted in the election won't end up with fifty fifty of their vote going to each candidate, but instead all-or nothing. The popular vote in your state counts, and not voting is just fucking moronic.

Another issue. There isn't just conservative and liberal. There is also Libertarian and Authoritarian. Actually, people are much less polarized in conservative and liberal ways anymore, and are more effected in libertarian and authoritarian ways, hence an apparent, but misnamed swelling of moderates.[/QUOTE]
so explain to me how my vote counts in the presidential election?

i've already shown that it doesn't.

If five hundred of you complaining bastards had voted in florida, the outcome would have been Gore.

[QUOTE=Gideon]If five hundred of you complaining bastards had voted in florida, the outcome would have been Gore.[/QUOTE]
look buddy, this is just politics. relax, it's a discussion.

anyway, what makes you think that 500 people in florida who share my sentiment whould have voted gore?

but like i said, if popular vote counted rather than the electoral college, gore would have won.

see what i'm saying chief?

If five hundred people in florida did not share your sentiment, then gore could not have carried the state, and so bush won rightfully. You don't want to agree with that, do you?

I see how there is a discrepancy in the popular and the electoral vote.

It's like how in a game of RISK, you get more guys for controlling continents rather than for hard territories.

You only complain about it when you own less continents. It's the rules of the game, and not enough people care to change them.

Your vote matters plenty in your state, and your state matters because of the electorate.

[QUOTE=Gideon]If five hundred people in florida did not share your sentiment, then gore could not have carried the state, and so bush won rightfully. You don't want to agree with that, do you?

I see how there is a discrepancy in the popular and the electoral vote.

It's like how in a game of RISK, you get more guys for controlling continents rather than for hard territories.

You only complain about it when you own less continents. It's the rules of the game, and not enough people care to change them.

Your vote matters plenty in your state, and your state matters because of the electorate.[/QUOTE]
but the electorate overrides the popular vote. i'm saying that's wrong. i don't care what could have happened if some odd number of people did do exactly what you said. if they did then i'm sure there would be another 500 voting the opposite way. this hypothetical speculation on "what if" certain people did this rather than actually taking a stand against what they feel is improper. there's a reason the voting process has been attempted to be amended. it's incredibly flawed. i refuse to vote for president on that principal. you can say that i'm just being lazy, that i'm just complaining, but in all actuality, as i said before, i'm attempting to fix the voting process by talking to people who have influence to being the process, petitions and so forth. you may see that as not attempting to do anything about it, but in all actuality, i'm doing everything i can about it. and i've not heard a single candidate speak out on the topic of the flawed voting process.

[QUOTE=trypdwyre] and i've not heard a single candidate speak out on the topic of the flawed voting process.[/QUOTE]

Ralph Nader.

[QUOTE=Gideon]Ralph Nader.[/QUOTE]
i'm talking serious candidates here.

Why is Ralph Nader not a serious candidate?

Do only people with Ds and Rs next to their name count?

Since nader is the only one who proposes to fix your electoral issue, then i guess it's not a serious issue.

great comeback.

come on! You can't say the "N" word! Seriously though, Nader should still make as much noise as he does, but not actually run. just in case. come on.

[QUOTE=DrGonzoHST]Why is Ralph Nader not a serious candidate?

Do only people with Ds and Rs next to their name count?[/QUOTE]
no, they don't. and the reason i don't vote nadar is he's basically in there to detract votes from the 2 major parties. based on the past and on the polls, the majority will continue going to the 2 major parites. and to top it off, i still am not going to vote for president using the current system.

Yeah, as much as I hate to be a repentant Nader voter, I'd rather Clinton-lite have made it in too. I will vote for Kerry this time, unless terrorists try to make sure I do.

i'd like to know why me not voting bothers you guys? i'm exercising my freedom to choose to vote, if i didn't like any of the candidates but didn't feel so strongly agains tthe voting system, i would continue to not vote. it's an option. voting is not manditory, and should be exercised only when you actually feel that one person should be in office, not when you're just picking the lesser of the evils. i posted something about supporting kerry as the lesser of the evils, but still, am not voting. everyone is told that they SHOULD vote, but the fact remains, they should vote if they want to, and if they actually care.

This is so fucking silly, you vote to elect the people who best represent your ideals. Whether enough other people vote to help you elect a certain candidate is irrelvant. This isn't a fucking horse race. You don't take into consideration polls or any of that shite because no one knows for certain until the votes are in.
And what if your candidate loses, or wins but is screwed out of his victory? Well there is, and will ALWAYS be, a record of your vote which says: a) you feel a certain way; that you're willing to vote to accomplish what you believe in.
Because THAT is what politicans go by to see what they should do/can get away with. They don't bother with polls, but by election results since they tell the desire of the only people who matter: voters.
If you don't vote you're playing into the hands of the government bureaucrats and fascists who [B]don't want you to vote[/B].

[QUOTE=Ozymandias]And what if your candidate loses, or wins but is screwed out of his victory? Well there is, and will ALWAYS be, a record of your vote which says: a) you feel a certain way; that you're willing to vote to accomplish what you believe in.
Because THAT is what politicans go by to see what they should do/can get away with. They don't bother with polls, but by election results since they tell the desire of the only people who matter: voters.
you already should know how i feel about being kept track of by the government. and all that record would mean is that the candidates would have to fabricate another story, or lie to try to get my vote. fact is voting president won't cahnge this, they won't destroy the system that got them in.

It doesn't particularly matter to me, I understand that some people are too fundamentally weak to take control of their government.

[QUOTE=Ozymandias]It doesn't particularly matter to me, I understand that some people are too fundamentally weak to take control of their government.[/QUOTE]
such a personal barb for something that you say doesn't matter.
i'm not too weak to control my government. if you read this thread you would understand that.
and if you read this thread you would understand why i refuse to vote on the president. this is not about me being weak, it's about me standing up for what i believe in, and exercising the rights my government gives to me.
i don't understand why that bothers you so.

[QUOTE=trypdwyre]you already should know how i feel about being kept track of by the government.[/QUOTE]
This from a man who works in a library. How many kids do you let each week take books without checking them out? I'm guessing none. Which is how it should be. There are no identifying marks on your ballot to indicate that it is from you, only to indicate for whom the vote was cast - doesn't matter what method your polling place uses; this is a land of the secret ballot. And once that ballot is marked, it becomes (in theory, anyway) a matter of public record: [i]"X number of votes were cast for so-and-so, and y number of votes were cast for whomever."[/i]

[QUOTE=Tuffy the Dump Truck]This from a man who works in a library. How many kids do you let each week take books without checking them out? I'm guessing none. Which is how it should be. There are no identifying marks on your ballot to indicate that it is from you, only to indicate for whom the vote was cast - doesn't matter what method your polling place uses; this is a land of the secret ballot. And once that ballot is marked, it becomes (in theory, anyway) a matter of public record: [i]"X number of votes were cast for so-and-so, and y number of votes were cast for whomever."[/i][/QUOTE]
tuffy, you crack my shit up buddy. despite what you may think, the library system i work in doesn't keep track of what you had out. it comes off your card, and we no longer can access that information. on top of that, we do not give out any info to the government. most libraries don't either. check it out. contact your local public library, better yet, contact the American Library Association [url]www.ala.org[/url] seriously tuffy, libraries are one of the last palces that are willing to give up that sort of information. we do keep number records, but they are not associated with any person, rather the item, so we can get rid of the things that do not go out.

as for the secret ballot, that's fine still. that doesn't change my stance on not utilizing a broken system.

[QUOTE=Ozymandias]If you don't vote you're playing into the hands of the government bureaucrats and fascists who [B]don't want you to vote[/B].[/QUOTE]

I agree here. Only MTV wants you to vote.

wow, I'm gone for 12 hours and this happens. Luckily trypd was here to say everything I WOULD'VE said. You guys are all saying the same thing different ways. You're not actually listening to any of the points trypd has made. all you know is that you disagree and you'll say anything for the sake of argument. I'm with trypd all the way. You guys are silly. You don't listen. and you argue points that have already been resolved, just because you can't admit the validity of trypd's points. Thanks trypd, you're my idol.

[QUOTE=tuffy]trypd, you crack my shit up buddy. despite what you may think, the polls don't keep track of who voted for whom. your name is crossed off the list when you vote, so that no one else can vote under your name, and no other information can be accessed. on top of that, they do not give out any identifying info to the government. no polls do. check it out. contact your local registrar of voters, better yet, contact the National Organization for Women [url]http://www.now.org[/url] (who keep just such an eye on these things) seriously trypd, the polls are one of the last places that are willing to give up that sort of information. they keep [b]no[/b] such records.[/QUOTE]

As for choosing not to vote, that's also your right, nor do I intend to dissuade you, but it's those who [i]do[/i] vote who continue to insure that right.

That, and an unregistered, untraceable firearm buried in a secure location.

[QUOTE=trypdwyre]they don't want me to vote? are you kidding, they don't [i]care[/i] if i vote. that's why they never implemented manditory voting. they know that it doesn't matter if you do or don't vote, with th way the electoral college is set-up, it really doesn't matter if you do or don't vote.[/QUOTE]

That is so naive and downright stupid that I'm disgusted that you were put in charge of the Politics forum. Have you ever seen a politician pander to the electorate? Have you ever noticed that they ignore the groups that vote the least? Do you....oh, fuck it, you're obviously not paying attention (as your idiotic "manditory voting" aside demonstrates).

[QUOTE=trypdwyre]such a personal barb for something that you say doesn't matter.
i'm not too weak to control my government. if you read this thread you would understand that.
and if you read this thread you would understand why i refuse to vote on the president. this is not about me being weak, it's about me standing up for what i believe in, and exercising the rights my government gives to me.
i don't understand why that bothers you so.[/QUOTE]

You're not standing up, you're sitting the fuck down. Nothing has ever been accomplished by abstaining from voting and nothing ever will. How exactly can we get rid of the electoral system without a president who is at the very least receptive to change? Voting for President might do little good, but not voting does zero good - except for the establishment of course. Bush would get a hard-on if he read your posts...

P.S. Your feeble attempts at misdirection by saying that what you do matters to and upsets me have failed.

[QUOTE=qualitycontrolrep]You're not actually listening to any of the points trypd has made.....and you argue points that have already been resolved, just because you can't admit the validity of trypd's points.[/QUOTE]

To summarize trypdwire:

1. The Electoral College is an imperfect representaion of the Populist will.
2. He refuses to take part.

What's to argue except that the USA is not a Populist country, nor does its Constitution intend it to be (it's a Republic.) But this is besides the point.

The ongoing debate here has not been about that; it has been about disliking the status quo, but doing nothing to change it but complain. Now, if Trypd said (and I may have missed it if he did) that he voted in all matters but the Presidency, I would understand his position - hell it would make perfect sense and I would concede all of his points. But, from what I read here, he says he doesn't vote, period, but he [b]does[/b] write his Congressman. I am hoping that he doesn't state in those letters that he doesn't in fact vote, since he would be lucky then to get even a form-letter in reply.

The system [u]isn't[/u] perfect; we knew that two-hundred twenty-odd years ago. That's why there are provisions for change in the social contract. But saying that you aren't going to play the game isn't going to affect any changes at all. Ever.

If you're going to gripe, you have got to vote. Vote with a ballot or a bullet, but if you don't do one or the other, you're a self-made victim.