What does that mean, bringing change? Does that mean electing a president who is not qualified for the job? That's the last change we got.
America is supposed to be a free country, meaning we are free to make choices. To vote or not to vote is a choice. My experience is that there lots of people in the country who don't pay attention to politics and don't care about the process. While unfortunate if they don't chose to participate it's their loss.
Having said that the only reason that we are talking about low turnout is that it's the last refuge of a president who got his clock cleaned in the mid terms. He's made it an issue to try to save face.
I'm not for mandatory voting at all for the two reasons mentioned so I do agree with you there. And I definitely don't think that people should vote if they do not care enough to at least attempt to become informed. Still, I do think its a bad thing that more of our country does not attempt to inform themselves and vote, and that its a bad thing that so few people here are politically active and aware.
Not with the current forecast-ed group of candidates they wont be. I just dont see 'excitement' for the current list of contenders. Even on this site we have people working hard to convince themselves that taking a big ol heaping steamy spoonful of that Clinton **** brownie is OK and a 'good' thing. And some have said outright they will not vote for her. And thats DEMOCRATS. SO...I dont think 2016 will be 'better' with the same crop of politicians. Warren...Booker...I think those are names they will need to get some real excitement going.Most non-citizens tend to vote only in our Presidential elections. Like in 2008 and 2012. They sat out the mid terms in 2010 and 2014.
They'll be voting in a vengeance in 2016.
It really was bad this year.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/12/opinion/the-worst-voter-turnout-in-72-years.html?_r=0
at this rate, 20% of registered voters (which of course is not all of those eligible to vote) are deciding things for all of us. That is not democracy.
I believe that every citizen should vote, but I respect the right of those who choose not to.
It really was bad this year.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/12/opinion/the-worst-voter-turnout-in-72-years.html?_r=0
at this rate, 20% of registered voters (which of course is not all of those eligible to vote) are deciding things for all of us. That is not democracy.
To add to the OP, the demographics say that it's the older generation that is mostly voting. When they are gone, what will happen? If that is not enough of a fact to make government want to engage youth, I don't know what is. Yet it seems some are more interested in suppressing vote. Pretty sad, don't you think?
Correct, so does giving your vote play a role in legitimizing and continuing what you already know to be " rigged " ?
Actually it is. It was 47% in my precinct. We went 54% for D Governor, 54% for R Representative in open seat, 68% for R State Senator and 57% for R State Representative.
Most non-citizens tend to vote only in our Presidential elections. Like in 2008 and 2012. They sat out the mid terms in 2010 and 2014.
They'll be voting in a vengeance in 2016.
Not the way I look at it. I have been a firm believer this country needs a viable third party for a very long time. That by voting Republican and/or Democrat what you are doing is perpetuating a business as usual system. But by voting for a third party candidate be that Reform, Constitutional, Libertarian, Green, what ever party is on your ballot you are registering you vote against the two parties and for a third party. Sort of putting your money where your mouth is.
I know both major parties has been bought and paid for by corporations, wall street firms, lobbyists, special interests and the like to incude pacs, super pacs and huge money donors. When each party can easily raise a billion dollars each just for a presidential campaign, that confirms it. Those folks I mentioned are good business people, if they didn't get back more than they donated they wouldn't do it. They are not donating out of civic good. They donate so they can get rewarded for their investment in the future.
I am not rich, all I have is my one vote. But I can make sure my one vote is cast against the rigged system.
And you have proof of this. Sure. :roll:
76 non-citizens registered (excuse me, claimed to have registered to vote) out of a 50,000 sample size for the survey used. Not bloody likely to have changed any outcomes.
I believe that every citizen should vote, but I respect the right of those who choose not to.
At least you see it for what it is, and I respect you all the more that
You didn't go to the link and read the entire study did you ?
The Judicial Watch is just an abstract.
Electoral Studies - Journal - Elsevier
I'm not going to get into partisan debates concerning the Republican and Democrat parties. It is precisely this sort of tribalism that stops many people from seeing that the system itself is the problem. And I'm neither a supporter of the Republicans or the Democrats , to me they represent the choice between Cheech and Chong , Tweedledum and Tweedledee
What things are supposed to be and what they are , are often two different things.
Have those that don't vote fared markedly different from those that did ?
Has your participation brought you any gains or losses that are different to those that never voted ?
And if the boot was on the other foot , would a Republican president not be using the same tactic ?
1, You didn't answer the question. What the hell does bringing change mean?
2, Things are as they are supposed to be. We get the government we deserve.
3, You are missing the point. An individual voter can't claim responsibility for what the government does or doesn't do so your question is pointless. I think it would be nice if everyone paid attention and participated. The truth is that more people want to see Kim Kardashian naked than go to the polls. That's ok, the rest of us will do the heavy lifting.
4. No other president, Republican or Democrat has ever has his clock cleaned like in the recent midterm and come out to say that two thirds of the voters who didn't vote would have given him a majority. That's delusional crazy talk. It's certainly beneath a President but I'm not surprised it came from Barry O.
Exactly. Seems that the more informed Democrat voter just stayed home this last time around.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?