Voting Debate

[relativity_x]

Any franchised person can either vote or not vote. Both sides have different reasons for their choice.

Generally, you'll hear nonvoters say they don't vote because their vote is insignificant, and you'll hear voters say "if you don't vote, you can't complain." I'd like to hear 2+2's reasons for voting/nonvoting.

Futhermore, I have two questions. Do you believe uninformed voters should vote? Which brings me to my next question, what are the implications of a significant number of uninformed voters voting?

[iron81]

A repost of mine from a while ago. I think its my longest 2+2 post:


Why you should vote

I've been meaning to do a thread on why people who are not gung ho about a candidate should vote anyway, but lehighguy beat me to it.

The simple reason you should vote is that you want to have a say in how your city/state/country is run. When you vote, you have a chance to exercise a right that millions of thousands of people have died to protect and you can influence the state to act in your own interest and improve society as a whole. Most people who don't believe in voting don't deny any of this, but they have their reasons for not voting. I will go through the major ones now and I'm sure the rest of you will fill me in on the rest of them. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Both sides are evil

This is the argument I have the largest problem with. If it were true, it would be cause for a massive revolution and either a new government or an AC society. The problem with this argument is it is patently untrue.

I submit that the major motivation for politicians to enter public service is a desire to do good. Most politicians would claim that they run for office because they have ideas that improve their jurisdiction. For such a person to be evil IMHO, they would have to have ulterior motives.

The major ulterior motive cited is money: politicians run for office for the money. As someone who is a former civil servant, I can tell you that wanting to make money is a bad reason to enter govt. service. Government employees are almost always paid less than they would be in the private sector. Lawyers making $500k / year leave their practice to run for Congress, Michael Bloomberg sets aside a billion dollar fortune to run for Mayor of New York, etc. Using Congress as an example, on top of a pay cut, maintaining 2 residences and paying for a dozen flights a year can eat at your pocketbook. And while the occasional bribery case is uncovered, most politicians are not on the take and there are very strict rules on cashing out campaign contributions.
The only explanation I can think of for someone wanting to accept these restrictions is that they feel a sense of civic duty.

Also, I want to cut the ACists off at the past by addressing the argument that the institution of government itself is evil. I will pick on HMKPoker here because I know his position. He has said before that the Democrats are slightly less evil than the Republicans due to issues like civil liberties and Iraq. However, since both sides remain evil, he declines to vote. My response to him would be:

1. The fact that the Democrats are less evil than the GOP is significant. If he votes for the Democrats, he has the ability to reduce evil.

2. The Democrats and the Republicans are not the only options. There is a functioning Libertarian Party in this country. The problem with liberals from an AC perspective is that while they generally are good on social issues, they favor expansion of the government economically and that as a result cannot support them. I would suggest to this person that they vote Libertarian. I have never subscribed to the "throw your vote away" argument: you should vote your conscience. For ACists, the Libertarians want to move the country in their direction on both Social and Economic issues: Legalizing pot and eliminating Social Security. It completely mystifies me that they are willing to cut off their nose to spite their face by refusing to support a party that from their perspective would make huge strides in improving the country.

The final point I would make here is that even if you believe that each party as a whole is evil, that is not the end of the equation. You are not voting for a party, you are voting for individual people. While the vast majority of politicians are not evil, obviously there is a lot of variance in the degree of evil within people. You are free to decide that you want one person or another to represent you who would do the best job of cleaning things up.

There is no difference between the candidates

The only explanation I can think of for this is that people are willfully blind. I am going to run down a list of the issues in the 2004 Presidential election where the candidates have what I believe was a major difference of opinion:

ANWR
Taxes on the Wealthy
War on Terror
Civil Liberties
Invasion/Law enforcement balance
The environment
Social Security
Health Care
Competence/Ability to correctly analyze a situation
Corporate/Union influence on govt.
Abortion
Character

Surely, everyone in this forum can identify several issues from this list that they care about. After that, it is simply a matter of selecting the candidate that fits your view the closest and selecting him.

I am protesting a corrupt system

I have heard many people say that they want to delegitimize the system: that by not voting, they are trying to change things for the better. This is exactly ass backwards. Voting is a vital means of affecting change, and not voting means that your voice will not be heard. Why do you think that there is little hope for major Social Security reform? Why do you think that the Christian Right has the ability to get online poker banned?

Its because 1. They vote and 2. They have interest groups that wield this voting power to get what they want. Neither of these interest groups contribute nearly as much money to campaigns as Corporate America, yet their lock on their issues is nearly absolute. If the millions of people who play poker cared enough about poker to organize to this extent, the online poker ban would be gone yesterday.

My vote doesn't count

This is the hardest argument for me to make, because it is correct that the odds of your specific vote tipping an election is almost nil. While I could argue that there are ways to multiply this power (donate money, volunteer) I want to make an argument that a solitary vote has signinicance. My argument is as follows:

1. Each vote having minimal significance is a good thing. When people have the disproportionate power that the non-voters would like, aristocracies form that neglect the needs of the masses. As much as I want Joe Blow voter to vote, I don't want him picking a leader by himself. The collective wisdom of a population is a much better indicator of who is the best leader.

2. Lighten up a little bit. There are all sorts of things that you need to do as a member of society that don't have much impact on the world. You should take care of your kids, you should be a productive member of society and you shouldn't punch people in the face, but if you fail to do these, the world will not collapse. Put voting into the same category as a civic duty.

Anyway, that's my diatribe. Although I will take this opportunity to plug the Democrats, I would much rather you vote Republican or Libertarian than not vote at all. Your country is asking you for your opinion on what kind of society we should have and I know all of you have strong opinions on that, otherwise you wouldn't be hanging around a politics forum. Voting is the best opportunity available shape the world the way you want. Thank you, and I hope you'll join me Nov. 7th in the voting booth.

[elwoodblues]

Given how close our past few elections have been, it's a tough sell to say that your vote doesn't matter. 1 vote will never determine the outcome of a presidential election (unless you count the Supreme Court justices "votes"), but things have been very close lately.

(half joking) I think we should have a "quorum" clause in the Constitution. Require at least 50% of eligible voters to actually vote, or else...

[GoodCallYouWin]

I will NEVER give up my right to complain! :P

edit : Also, I don't vote because you need government I.D. to do so, and I don't have / want any I.D.

[relativity_x]

You addressed my first question, but what do you think of uninformed voters? Do you believe their impacts on the democratic process are negligible?

Also, it'd be nice to see more Republicans/Democrats branch over to the Libertarian party. I feel they don't because "they're wasting a vote" as you said in your post. I suffer from this too because I don't feel comfortable voting for a 3rd party, so I've got to decide what's more important to me, economic/social issues.

Finally, if people were informed and voted for the candidate who they had most in common with, I believe we'd see more 3rd parties elected.

[Case Closed]

iron,

I don't mean to be nitty, but there is also a functioning Green Party in this country. There are many options for people to vote for, they just have to look for them.

[ianlippert]

I dont vote because I dont feel I have the right to force people to live their lives how I want them to. It has nothing to do with corruption or evil government, but when you add that stuff on top the entire democratic process is pretty rediculous.

[iron81]

GCYW, I don't know about your area, but in my area you don't need a government ID to vote. You can prove your residency to register with a utility bill and you don't need any ID at all at the polling place.

Relativity, I don't think truly uninformed voters (people who don't know who the candidates, issues or general party stances) vote much at all. Of course, there are a lot of people who vote who don't know as much about the issues, but it is still important their voice be represented, because their interests are often different than those well versed in politics.

Many times, I've voted for a candidate I've never heard of in a minor race merely because of the "D" next to their name. I do this because based on my knowledge of politics, the D's are better than the R's so its ev+ to elect as many Democrats as possible. I don't see anything wrong with this kind of limited information voting.

CC, you did mean to be nitty, but that's ok.

[Case Closed]

iron,

Yeah I am a huge nit when it comes to the Greens. I gotta rep them whenever I can. Nice post though. I agree with the sentiment of just getting people to vote is always a good thing.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
Given how close our past few elections have been, it's a tough sell to say that your vote doesn't matter.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well as long as-
[ QUOTE ]
1 vote will never determine the outcome of a presidential election

[/ QUOTE ]
it's a pretty easy sell.