MetaChat - Non-voters: Explain Yourselves to LT!

I feel you, LT. Last election cycle, I did some volunteering at shows for Music For America working tables at shows registering kids to vote. My first few shows were pretty successful.

Worked the Plea for Peace tour that was put on by Mike Park. Great show. Planes Mistaken for Stars. Saul Williams (who I got to chat with a bit, and was an awesome, positive, laid-back guy off-stage), and Cursive headlining (whom I never much cared for, but they brought the kids out in droves). Registered a good 80 or so kids to vote that night. The only problems I had were one kid coming up after imploring him to register to vote all accusatory with a big "For Who?????". In TX, you don't have to declare a party, so I just smiled and said, "Whoever you care to. Just do it". And he registered. The other was a girl in town from Oregon. Registering to vote state-by-state, some with party-affiliation, some with various other statistical measures. I figured she wasn't all that serious when she answered the "Race" box (which, according to my chart, is req'd for OR) with "Human". Thanks for wasting my time, sweetie.

After that I worked a Decemberists show, which, again, not a big fan (though they put on a entertaining show). I can't remember who all opened for them, but it was all-ages, so I got a lot of kids that were underage that still took some stickers and pins and whatnot, and a few of whom wanted applications to volunteer. I think I got some 20 or so registered that evening.

My final show that summer was a Ministry/KMFDM show. That was worlds away from the previous two shows. I hit up probably 150 or so people to register and got met with mostly "Bah, what's the point?" or "Nah, I got a rap sheet"*. Ended up getting maybe four registrations that night, which was especially interesting since Al Jourgenson was at his peak of anti-Bush performance and it was one of the most intensely politically charged concerts I've ever seen.

Just my experience from last time 'round.

My two bits, personally? I've only lived and voted in Oklahoma and Texas, and both the times I've voted in Texas for Pres were when Bush was running, so really, my vote hasn't ever much counted. But I'll be damned if I don't do it. Ever.

*I did inform some of those that answered this way that even if they've been convicted of felonies, depending on the time since their sentences have been served, they can petition to have their voting rights re-instated (at least in TX). Unfortunately, I didn't have the info on me, so I just kind of had to tell them to Google for it.

posted by ufez 07 January | 22:00

Actually LT, you're coming across like one of those all knowing born again Christians. No, they don't hate you, they just want to start a dialog in which they know they are right and want to convert you. Seriously, do you actually read what you write? It really must KILL YOU to proofread. Seriously, you come out and say that anyone is a stupid asshole not to vote, and then say it's just a dialog? Get real.

I do vote, but I missed the last local elections because I just plain forgot. The last Presidential election I was majorly apathetic. I did it anyways though. There were some local elections that I had interest in and that brought me to the polls. But, if it was just the presidential election, I might have forgone it.

Here's what makes me apathetic. The larger campaigns, especially the presidential, are all about marketing. Since Bush the first, I've felt that candidates will say and do anything just to gain that power. When they get there, they'll do whatever the fuck they want anyway. Also, these are huge marketing media campaigns where they have focus groups to determine the minutiae of the campaign. It has so little to do with ideals, and much to do with image. The differences in the parties amount to a few emotional hotbutton issues, and they generally have very little to do with managing this country well. The last part, living in the west, the election is usually determined by the time I get to vote in the afternoon. Media trumpets their predictions based on exit polls and early results.

Again, as far as national politics goes, I have minimal interest. What keeps me voting are my local elections. If the ballot was just for President, it's become harder and harder for me to give a shit. Perhaps this year will be different, we'll see. In my voting life (Since 1982) the last presidential election was a low point for me.

posted by eekacat 07 January | 22:02

okaaaay. awkward.

/me puts cigarette out on floor. shuffles out of thread

posted by ufez 07 January | 22:07

Seriously, you come out and say that anyone is a stupid asshole not to vote, and then say it's just a dialog?

Well, it's a dialogue in which LT presumably hopes to persuade non-voters into voting, or at least argue his case. Nothing wrong with that.

Also, I think LT was clearly saying that not voting is a stupid thing to do, not that non-voters are stupid people.

posted by matthewr 07 January | 22:10

Voting without violence or threat is one of the finest things our country can offer it's citizens

Running water, heat, garbage collection, tax refunds, health care, free Doritos (a girl can dream)- these are some of the finer things a country can offer it's citizens. Voting is nice, but I can see why people feel their vote is totally meaningless and voting has nothing to do with their everyday life.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 07 January | 22:24

And you know what else? I don't care if people don't vote. People not voting is just more votes for me.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 07 January | 22:26

Running water, heat, garbage collection, tax refunds, health care

All affected by how one votes.

posted by bmarkey 07 January | 22:27

Of course, but I understand how disconnected it all can seem.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 07 January | 22:30

It doesn't even matter who you vote for, as long as you bother to do so.

Yes, actually it does. The US and UK FPTP voting systems are so irredeemably broken as to be utterly useless unless you want to vote for the respective Tweedledum or Tweedledee of each country. If you're not voting for one of the major parties, you are simply lending legitimacy to this rigged and busted system, and actually working against your own interests.

posted by pompomtom 07 January | 22:31

I can understand feeling disenfranchised - the first few presidential elections I could vote in were the Reagan - Bush disasters. I comforted myself with the knowledge that at least my vote was cancelling out that of some yee-haw Reaganista. The Politics of Petty Vengance can be quite compelling, when that's all you've got.

posted by bmarkey 07 January | 22:36

Nixon's head is still not a candidate.

Srsly, plenty of legitimate reasons not to vote:

1) If you live in a strong Red/Blue state, your vote simply won't count. Yay electoral college.
2) In a theoretical level, votes legitimize officials. A president elected with 100 million votes is more legitimate than one elected with 10 million. Not so much practical difference, though -- see a certain "around 50%" (of voters) shoving his views over the other 75% (of population).
3) One may really, honestly, not care about either one. In which case the difference between staying home watching TV and going there just to write-in "whatever" on the ballot is just the effort.
4) One can make the argument that if someone is too lazy to decide who to vote for, we're better off with that person not voting.
5) One can be an Anarcho-{communist,sindicalist,capitalist}. Voting would be a contradiction.
6) One can be a Leninist revolutionary. Time wasted voting is time that could be spent shooting the bourgeoise with a Kalashnikov.
7) In the current American status quo, I believe that the real important stage is the primaries. There you can pick a party, and have a vote that's sure to count. In fact, I believe every non-party-affiliated person should vote for the lesser evil on the primaries of the party _opposite_ to their current political position. Because once it gets to the election, it's just a fucking swing state lottery -- you can at least try to make the "losing" result palatable. The question of whether the dice are loaded is left as an exercise to the reader.

posted by qvantamon 07 January | 22:39

Not voting as a form of protest or making a statement has always confused me. It's not the same thing as not patronizing a business that you don't like. And not voting because "it just doesn't matter anyway" isn't much better. It's a self fulfilling prophecy and the start of endless cycle. Now on the other hand, I'm not a fan of uninformed voting either. It's just depressing to know that so many people won't take the time to spend at least a few minutes during the election cycle and find someone that they feel best represents their hopes and views and goes out on Election Day to vote. Even if their vote is in the minority, it can still have an effect on policy. I'm a skeptic and a cynic, and I feel for the disillusioned, but I still have reverence for our (admittedly flawed) election process. For me I hate the horse race/playing the odds system (aka two party system) that's become so dominant in the past century. But even a vote for a rogue candidate that better suits your views could send a message and nudge the pendulum your way if there are at least a few of you out there. I'd be lying if I said that I don't consider "the odds" when placing my votes - and on several occassions I have voted for my second choice in stead of my first, becasue I knew my first didn't stand a chance in hell and my second choice was better than THEM. Like I said, it's flawed.

posted by Slack-a-gogo 07 January | 22:45

I've missed one or two primaries and no general elections since 1982. I feel that even if my vote doesn't do much good, if I don't vote, I don't really have a right to complain.

posted by octothorpe 07 January | 22:48

If you're not voting for one of the major parties, you are simply lending legitimacy to this rigged and busted system, and actually working against your own interests.

As opposed to what? Unless you're planning a coup, what are the alternatives that would work *with* your/mine/our own interests? I'm genuinely curious.

posted by ufez 07 January | 22:54

Not voting as a form of protest or making a statement has always confused me

On its own, it's barely better than voting in the rigged sytem and lending them some legitimacy: but it still is better. If you're not-voting for a reason other than laziness, then next thing is to campaign for electoral reform and/or get into the streets and start breaking things.

But even a vote for a rogue candidate that better suits your views could send a message and nudge the pendulum your way if there are at least a few of you out there.

Not really true in any practical sense, because the message is drowned out by the far louder message "You only have to be marginally less repulsive than the other mob!" Look at Nader. Did splitting the US left's vote send any messages, apart from "Best get these laws through while we've still got the tiller"?

Until FPTP voting is fixed, there's bugger all point voting in the US unless you want to vote for the War Party or the Other War Party.

posted by pompomtom 07 January | 23:02

pompomtom:

Until FPTP voting is fixed, there's bugger all point voting in the US unless you want to vote for the War Party or the Other War Party.

That's not entirely true. It would actually be the War Party^TM or the Other war Party. The second war is not capitalized - you know, to make it look less threatening.

posted by Slack-a-gogo 07 January | 23:08

Nixon's head is still not a candidate.

That Futurama episode was on last night and I remember at the end, Nixon's head won by a just one vote and Fry and Leela said they couldn't be blamed because they didn't vote.

If just a few more people voted in Florida ~~then the election would have been harder for Bush to steal and~~ things would be quite different. We're approaching 4,000 dead US soldiers in Iraq.

At the national level, I'm frustrated that my vote for president doesn't count. I live in an area that voted 70% for Gore and 70% for Kerry, yet all of the state's electoral college delegates went to the commander guy. I'm surrounded by counties that went 70%+ for W. But I will still vote for the democrat in November.

I always vote but I can see how people could be disenchanted with the process. The system is set up almost to discourage participation. My vote doesn't count, but those in "swing states" votes do count. I hate the Iowa Caucus and New Hampshire acting as the killing fields to narrow the candidate pool so that by the time my state has its primary, the candidates have already been chosen. Although I hate the system, I am excited to see that twice as many people in Iowa turned out. And in a "red state" Democrats went to the polls 2x that of Republicans. I hope there is more excitement and more people voting this time around.

It was Geddy Lee who once said, "If you chose not to decide, you still have made a choice." In the US, apathy wins all of the elections since the % of people who just don't show up is larger than those for a candidate. We have the government we deserve and if people don't like it, they can do something about it. Although I see more outrage over Burger King not selling Whoppers for a day than about what is happening in our name in DC.

posted by birdherder 07 January | 23:11

Look at Nader. Did splitting the US left's vote send any messages, apart from "Best get these laws through while we've still got the tiller"?

Well, more of a message than the non-voters sent, as far as I can tell.

posted by mullacc 07 January | 23:24

You don't go to the polls with the electoral system you want; you go with the one you have. While ours is certainly not functioning correctly, it is still the only game in town. Do you want to have a half-assed say in what happens, or absolutely zero say?

posted by bmarkey 07 January | 23:25

I had to look up FPTP voting system - never heard the term before.

On the whole, I must say that I agree with LT's sentiments at the top of the thread. I do not believe that withholding my legitimation of the electoral system will further my interests, and I honestly cannot understand how that logic works. It's nice to think, however, that without the supreme legitimacy conferred on it by pieisexactlythree's implicit consent, the entire American political system would topple like a house of cards, but I'm not holding my breath. Entire parties withhold their participation from Pakistan to Venezuela, and yet the system lumbers on.

Anyhow, I don't think I need to remind you all how much is at stake based on the next couple appointments to the supreme court.

Also, pompomtom, you've made several alusions to the system being "rigged" or "fixed." Please expand and unpack that.

posted by pieisexactlythree 07 January | 23:27

I usually vote, for no better reason than lying and saying "I voted" to shut people up who ask me causes me marginally more psychic pain than voting as an academic who can just take off whenever to go vote.

Probably the biggest reason that people don't vote is that they have something better to do with that hour or ten minutes or whatever. And they're almost certainly correct. The only substantive effect voting in any non-tiny-local race will have is upon your own feelings. The probability of changing the outcome of the election by making or breaking a tie is essentially zero, so your vote isn't going to have any effect on the outside world, only on your own interior world. So if you think you have a better way to spend that time, just thinking that makes it true.

posted by ROU Xenophobe 07 January | 23:39

Do you want to have a half-assed say in what happens, or absolutely zero say?

In an established FPTP system, this isn't a choice you have if you don't support one of the main parties. It's just not a question.

If having a say in the government is important from that perspective, you're still better off abstaining and protesting. In the position of someone in the US, if I wanted to have some say in policy, I'd start by getting violent (well, ideally, by organising others to be violent...), as I gather your Declaration of Independence encourages. (Happily I've recently been mollified by a good result, in a voting system which allows recognition of the non-major parties).

(also:

You don't go to the polls with the electoral system you want; you go with the one you have

...is not really much of an argument. If that were to be applied to the US in toto, it'd still be a part of the British Empire. )

posted by pompomtom 07 January | 23:39

I'm in Canada.

I can't even vote here, as I'm a landed immigrant, and don't have voter's rights.

I think voting for TPS would be good, although I get the impression that if she won, most of the US would be covered in pink sparkly things and there'd be showtunes worked in there as well, which, quite frankly, is a damn sight better than the former administration sending cruise missiles into crowded public markets.

In short: GO TEEPS!

posted by Zack_Replica 07 January | 23:40

TPS FOR PRESIDENT!
Glitter, gossip, and gays for all!!!

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 07 January | 23:45

In the position of someone in the US, if I wanted to have some say in policy, I'd start by getting violent
Thank you sir to please stay wherever it is you are!

That's roughly the position of some NRA cold dead hands types I've talked to who insist that "a well organized citizen militia should be maintained to be able to overthrow the government if it becomes tyranical" or something like that. Yeah, good luck with that, guys.

posted by pieisexactlythree 07 January | 23:45

pompomtom: since you're not here in the US, let me point out that armed insurrection here is about as likely as a world-wide rain of canned peaches. It just ain't gonna happen, Che. The masses are narcotized beyond mobilization. If two GWB administrations aren't enough to foment revolution, nothing short of the destruction of cable TV will do it. If you've got the funding for the missiles needed to bring down the sattlites, I'm listening. Otherwise, you've got no traction.

posted by bmarkey 07 January | 23:53

If just a few more people voted in Florida ~~then the election would have been harder for Bush to steal and~~ things would be quite different.

If just a few more Nader voters in Florida, a mere 600 or so of 20,000+, had voted strategically, things would be quite different.

Third party candidates are for suckers, but at least those suckers are voting.

posted by Joe Invisible 07 January | 23:55

Once I debated this with a kid who was hip in that truly-poor way that only truly-poor hip kids can be. He was barely living. He sometimes picked up cigarette butts off the street to smoke them. He didn't eat much. He knew drugs well enough and too well. He was one of my best and most beloved friends ever and still is, wherever he is...

All I said to him to change his mind on this subject was:

"If everyone voted, do you think shit would be the way it is now?"

And he said:

"Well, no..." and then gave me this look like: "you asshole."

posted by scarabic 07 January | 23:59

≡ Click to see image ≡

posted by pieisexactlythree 08 January | 00:02

If you've got the funding for the missiles needed to bring down the sattlites, I'm listening.

You just need a good hacker and access to the control room. See, e.g., The Running Man.

posted by Joe Invisible 08 January | 00:07

Entire parties withhold their participation from Pakistan to Venezuela, and yet the system lumbers on.

Tell that to Thaksin Shinawatra.

Boycotts do have an effect. W/r/t Pakistan, did you notice that Musharaff actually wanted Bhutto back in the country? Without her, there'd've been very little legitimacy to the impending elections, which would be a blow to him. Sharaf only agreed to join in once Bhutto had.

Also, pompomtom, you've made several alusions to the system being "rigged" or "fixed." Please expand and unpack that.

A FPTP voting system is bound to favour two existing major parties. Any third party is bound to either be coopted by an existing major party, or split the vote with their most similar competitor to the disadvantage of both. Umm.. that's about it. I'm surprised that the uselessness of FPTP voting, for delicate jobs like consensus-building, needs exposition.

(Correct me if I'm wrong on the history, but it had always seemed to me that the US is a fantastic example of this systemic bias. The two major (only, really) parties essentially swapped political poles between the late 19th and early 20th centuries, without having to let go of their mutual stranglehold on Congress.)

Any third party wanting to actually influence policy, rather than just grandstand, is going to be co-opted to one or other of the original parties due to the existing electoral dynamic. Lather, rinse and repeat.

posted by pompomtom 08 January | 00:15

LT, we have talked via email and I hope you understand that I love you like one of the brothers I never had.

Still - a - shitbomb of a post to mecha.

NOTE:

Yes I am a mod here but this is in no way meant as a statement of mecha policy.

posted by arse_hat 08 January | 00:18

pompomtom: since you're not here in the US, let me point out that armed insurrection here is about as likely as a world-wide rain of canned peaches.

So... just slightly more likely than a third-party vote being anything but a waste of time. ;-)

But seriously, perhaps a few more years of carnage in the ME may radicalise some of the poor slobs doing the dying. Until then, the US is going to be stuck, like now, in the absurd position of wondering whether to punish the administration by handing the reigns over to some of the very same people who enabled that same administration to start that same war.

posted by pompomtom 08 January | 00:29

Okay - um, first of all:

1. I'm definitely not trying to come off like a born-again Christian. I can't go that long without blinking.

2. I genuinely meant what I said - I wanted a dialogue. Not anger, ranting or abuse. I never was going to be a proselitizer here.

3. People who don't vote - yes, it bothers me. I think not voting is a big waste.

4. Proofreading or no, shitbomb or no - I love what everyone has commented here.

Onward!

posted by Lipstick Thespian 08 January | 00:48

perhaps a few more years of carnage in the ME may radicalise some of the poor slobs doing the dying.

Nope. It's gonna take gas going for more than $10 a gallon.

the US is going to be stuck, like now, in the absurd position of wondering whether to punish the administration by handing the reigns over to some of the very same people who enabled that same administration to start that same war.

If memory serves, neither Kucinich nor Obama voted for the war. So, y'know... not really.

posted by bmarkey 08 January | 00:52

I'm kinda half-hearted on voting. Granted, I haven't exactly had many opportunities to vote (twice, I think). I know that MD is pretty democratic, but I sit firmly on the fence. I hate all sides, for various reasons.

Although, my folks recently told me that I can vote in the primaries, even though I'm 'unaffiliated'. Interesting.

As far as the current prez race goes, my issue is the fact that there's too many candidates. It's hard to remember who's who when they're all fussing about similar things. I'm eager to see the field cleared a little bit (but I hate the whole, 'oh, there's only 2 candidates' bullshit).

posted by sperose 08 January | 01:05

I genuinely meant what I said - I wanted a dialogue.

I have written and erased three versions of this comment so far. This -- I hope -- will be the politest one.

The tone of your initial post most definitely did not invite dialogue.

It seemed more like a challenge than an invitation.

posted by jason's_planet 08 January | 01:22

I've voted in all the presidential elections I've been eligible for. I skipped the last local election because: I had just moved and didn't know which polling place I was registered at; I was completely emotionally overwhelmed by my internship, which I had to go to that day and which is not really something I could duck out of to go vote, but going afterwards was just too much for me to handle that day (I seem to remember having a complete sobbing breakdown that morning during yoga class; it was not a good day), plus I had a class that evening; and the California/SF local ballots require voting on a shitload of referendums (referenda?), which are written by laypeople, which means you really do need to do research ahead of time because there's no way to understand all the potential consequences of each of them without reading a number of opinion pieces on each of them, and while I liked the referendum process when I first moved here (Democracy! Yay!), I'm starting to find it tedious and ridiculous, because things get passed that just aren't viable, and the things that would make them viable don't get passed (my favorite was the first year I was here, in which one referendum asked for additional money for health care, I think -- that passed -- and another asked for higher taxes to pay for the first referendum -- that got voted down; wtf, people?).

posted by occhiblu 08 January | 01:28

(In other words, it was just one of those days that I was barely scraping by in getting through the bare minimum of what I had to do, and the effort that voting would have required would probably have completely overwhelmed me.)

posted by occhiblu 08 January | 01:31

I do not vote. I have never voted, and likely never will. The winner of the presidential election is announced long before Alaska's polls are closed, so there's really no point in that election.

Politics bores me. Legislation bores me. What little I hear of both sides, I can understand their side of things. The gas pipeline in Alaska will create more jobs. Nod. It will harm the environment. Nod. Mayoral Candidate A wants better schools and would be great. Nod. Candidate A is a homo-hater and would be awful. Nod. I honestly cannot be bothered to sit and search out non-biased information so I can wade through pros and cons of both sides.

It's been stressed to me how important it is to be a well-informed voter, but I can't stand the information. Going to the polls would be like doing eenie-meenie-miney-moe, which is hardly conducive to... any kind of result, really.

posted by rhapsodie 08 January | 01:54

If memory serves, neither Kucinich nor Obama voted for the war. So, y'know... not really.

You know, it may be that my Westminster background over-estimates the importance of parties w/r/t US politics, but I see the Democratic party as an entity entirely culpable. Don't get me wrong, I sincerely hope Obama is the next president, but with his party association he's still tainted.

Still, to answer the original question, I'd say technically qvantamon's got it with his/her first reason, and there's always the prisoners'-dilemma-writ-large aspect. Having said all that, I always vote ('above the line', which involves numbering about 60 contenders in order of preference, because I'm difficlut like that), and only partly cos it's the law. The one time I could've abstained without committing an offence, when I was living outside the country, I voted anyway, out of spite.

posted by pompomtom 08 January | 02:37

Like Zack_replica I'm a Landed Immigrant here in Canada and cannot vote. BUT although it was a bit of a hassle (and I just remembered I need to inform them of my change of address) I am registered to vote in Washington state and do so by mail-in ballot.

I was sooo excited when I could start voting. And sooo disappointed when Bush Sr. won over Dukakis.

posted by deborah 08 January | 04:27

I love voting. I love it so much I do it twice as much as other people - for elections in my country of citizenship and for those in my country of residence. I still get a huge buzz dropping my ballot into the box.

But I'm Australian. As pompomtom notes when he says "I always vote and only partly cos it's the law", it was instilled in me from birth that every single contribution to the democratic process is very important, so important that one has to pay money to NOT get your name crossed off at the polling booth. It's another obligation, like taxes. Australia also has preferential voting and proportional representation, though, so smaller parties/independents have greater chance of being elected, reducing the likelihood that any vote is a 'wasted vote'. In England, not so much, and I find it much harder to vote here as I can't allocate preferences.

It's difficult for us outside of the US to hear of Americans choosing to throw away their vote - decsisions made by US leaders unfortunately impact on the rest of us, and the apathy so many Americans show towards their democratic systems is frightening when the potential consequences for the world are so great.

posted by goo 08 January | 06:06

I'm Australian/British too, and vote in Aussie elections because I have to. I'm usually completely unaware there's an election until I get the notice through from Australia House, then I look up the candidates on the web.

But I didn't vote in the last UK General Election, because (a) I couldn't bear to cast a vote for Labour, despite having been a life-long labour voter (b) the Conservatives always win by a huge margin in my constituency anyway and (c) those were the only two candidates. In truth, my MP is a very good constituency MP.

I always vote in local elections, for the Lib-Dems, because there's no Labour candidate.

posted by essexjan 08 January | 06:34

I don't vote (in the UK), because of dissatisfaction with the process. UK parliamentary elections are a two horse race, facilitated by a cosy system that is actively protected by the only two potential beneficiaries (in Labour's case, despite prior commitments to work towards opening the electoral system out in a fairer way).

As votes are only interpretable in one way (positive approval of the beneficiary), that is not representative of my reason for voting, then I opt not to do it. My hope is that as more and more become disillusioned with the cosy group wank of politics as usual, and turnout figures drop and drop, that even the two main parties will recognise that something constructive has to be done to restore faith in the democratic process. Almost certainly a pipedream, although the woeful turnout HAS been discussed relatively extensively in the last few elections.

When I can be bothered, I turn up to spoil my ballot. I should do this consistently, but if I get home from work late then I sometimes don't.

posted by bifter 08 January | 07:04

I also vote in every election I can. I don't think I've missed too many in my almost 20 years of being of age. I am Canadian, as many of you know, and truthfully, our system isn't much better than the US'. It's tons of marketing up here, and if a left/right bias of a party was expressed as 0% for the most left, and 100% was the most right, I suspect the current Liberals and Conservatives to be probably about 45% and 55% respectively. Truth be told, I really think the parties are similar. Oh, there is the NDP, but I can't ever imagine trying to elect a party with no history of putting a government together.

When Bob Rae got his hands on Ontario, he left it in such a shambles that the Conservatives got back in, and had to clean up, while being vilified for being program cutters and cruel to the less privileged. Maybe there was some truth to it, but...anyway. I could go on.

I'm not highly political, but I have some very strong basic beliefs about life and living and how and where a government should be interfering in the lives of it's people. I try my best to use my vote to push the country a little closer to what I think it should be. I am under no illusion that voting X in a strongly Y geographical area will have much of an effect. BUT, any effect my vote makes is down to ME. When I see the numbers, I know that ONE of those votes was mine. I feel I did my part, and did it as best I can. That's important to me.

I also agree with octothorpe, that voting gives me a cleaner conscience for complaining. Not the complaining does much.

Oh, and for what it's worth, LT, yeah, it was bombastic, but I had no fear of reprisal had I come in here disagreeing with you. Perhaps others aren't as familiar with you, but I wanted to let you know that somebody knew what you meant. You, like many of us, continue to be a student and were looking for info about why people do something. Cheers.

posted by richat 08 January | 08:59

Haven't read all the comments, so excuse me if my comments are off-base. I get the impression many of my comments are... I don't vote because:

1. I am completely and utterly disgusted by the political process. My vote will not change that. They're all corrupt. The basic system is practically demands corruption. It'd be like voting for the used car salesman to be your #1 swindler.

2. When I did vote, I never once voted for a winning candidate. Instead the people were hypnotized by the media/marketers/big-money-people to vote in people like Reagan, Bush, etc.

3. Voter registration lists are used for other things than voting, like calling people for jury duty. No matter what your opinion of jury duty, I don't think it should ride on, and be an extra burden of just wanting to vote.

posted by DarkForest 08 January | 09:58

It's not like you can't get information from non-biased sources.

Say what?! Can you mind-read the candidates now?

posted by DarkForest 08 January | 10:02

I would vote if I could. I mean, I can vote for New Zealand elections, but I don't feel right about that, because I would be having a say in the country I don't live in and that feels weird (and I'm not legally obligated to vote in NZ, just for all those people who get it confused with Australia ;) )

And I can't vote in the US.

posted by gaspode 08 January | 10:09

I've voted in the major elections, but I'm really lax about the local stuff, especially now that I've moved somewhere I know I'm not going to stay. Part of it is religious - while buddhists certainly can and do participate in political activism, there's also a don't-get-involved ethic that encourages one to clean up their own house before trying to save the world. And part of it is just simple economics. Is my time and effort worth having a miniscule effect on the vote? The likely benefit to me is almost nothing, while the cost is much higher. If I really feel strongly about a candidate I'd be much better off campaigning to get others to vote.

posted by desjardins 08 January | 11:50

The US is such a global elephant and the vast majority of the planet's inhabitants have ZERO say in our policies that will affect them (even more than they will affect me, in a lot of cases). I vote because they don't get to, and I vote for the people I feel are least likely to screw them (or me) over.

And at least when the numbers are published the rest of the world knows at least SOME Americans aren't happy with the way things are now. (Not voting doesn't send the same message.)

Yes, all the candidates are from the same ruling class, but at least some of them have a sense of noblesse oblige that is distinctly lacking in the current administration.

Also, I vote because I was raised to believe it was my duty as an American not to shut up and be passive. I don't do much else- vote and write letters.

posted by small_ruminant 08 January | 12:26

I once knew a woman who wouldn't register to vote because she didn't want to get called to jury duty. It was one of many things I disliked about her.

I almost didn't vote in our last local election. It was rainy and I was sick and the kids had worn me down that day. But I did because there was a tight race for a supervisor position. After a recount, my candidate ended up winning by one vote. ONE. I'm so glad I got off my ass and cast that vote.

posted by jrossi4r 08 January | 12:27

I DO vote in the local elections although I didn't use to. As I get less nomadic I see more and more that local elections have huge impacts on people's daily lives.

Local elections decide who is on the panel that will decide whether or not WalMart gets to open downtown, or which books the local high school is allowed or not allowed to teach. The rest of us ignoring the boring and petty local elections, school board and PTA meetings (which I'm not involved in, having no kids) and so on are what have allowed the fundamentalists to get such a strong foothold in this country, despite their relatively small numbers. They are active! And they VOTE!

posted by small_ruminant 08 January | 12:31

Thinking more on local elections:

I think it's a little (too) easy for me to be a bit apathetic about local elections, especially the propositions, in San Francisco because I'm actually a centrist in this city, and end up without a strong opinion one way or the other about a lot of the issues here; that is, I can see pluses and minuses of passing and not passing any of the props. Plus, the DA was running unopposed (and I like her), and Newsom was pretty much guaranteed to win (there were no other viable candidates).

I think most of the major big-issue propositions wait until the presidential elections anyway, because they know voter turnout will be higher.

All this to say... California and San Francisco have kind of weird systems, and it's also nice to live in a place where I actually am comfortable with almost any of the likely local election outcomes.

posted by occhiblu 08 January | 12:46

occhiblu- that's so true, although there are suprising ultra-conservative platforms that pop up, usually centering on someone's idea of what's good for businesses.

posted by small_ruminant 08 January | 12:48

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you get a jury duty summons and just ignore it, they're not likely to do anything about it. I've never suffered any consequences for blowing those things off.

I love what small_ruminant said about the rest of the world not having a say in what the US does, so we ought to participate out of conscience for our neighbors.

It also saddens me that the inconvenience of going to the polling place keeps people from participating. In Oregon, the ballot comes to you. Literally - they mail it to you, and you have a couple weeks to think it over and return it. I could mail mine back in, but I enjoy the thrill of dropping it off by hand on election day. I work downtown and there are several places to drop it off within two blocks of the office.

posted by pieisexactlythree 08 January | 12:49

although there are suprising ultra-conservative platforms that pop up, usually centering on someone's idea of what's good for businesses.

Weirdly, though, for the first time in my life, I often look at some of the activist local causes around here and think, "OK, but that doesn't sound like it's a good idea for local businesses." (Granted, that's local businesses. I have no problem keeping major chains out, but I don't think that issue's come up yet in the short-ish time I've been here.) Like I said, it's weird living in a place where there are people way to the left of me, and those people have actual political clout.

Also, I do realize that all of what I've typed in this thread is justification rather than any sort of good reasoning; just trying to sort through my thought processes on this one.

posted by occhiblu 08 January | 12:56

occhiblu- I agree with you on that, too. I never feel like a left-winger until I leave the Bay Area, at which point it becomes very clear what a lefty I am.

I'm thinking of the ultra-conservative platforms I've run into, and all the ones that spring to mind are Chinese. There are a lot of conservative immigrant groups in San Francisco, but I think the Chinese business groups are the best organized.

pieisexactlythree, I drop off my absentee ballot in person because I want the "I voted" sticker :)

posted by small_ruminant 08 January | 13:04

So do either of you ever get into arguments with people to the left of you?

posted by pieisexactlythree 08 January | 13:36

I'm 17 and a convicted felon. Also, I don't have any picture ID to show at the polling place. And my living situation is a little dicey and temporary. Come to think of it, a lot of things about my life are a little dicey and temporary, and not necessarily the kind of thing that'll stand up to much scrutiny from any authorities. Knowing that major party X pretty much runs things in my locality anyway (and besides, even if they didn't, neither party seems very interested in doing anything for me, and people like me, besides shitting on us from a great height), is it really worth the risk?

(Note: I haven't missed an election in about seven years, and I haven't missed a state or national one since I became eligible. But somewhere in there, maybe there's a reason good enough to justify not voting.)

posted by box 08 January | 13:41

box, I didn't think you could vote til you were 18? You were convicted as a juvenile? Doesn't that make a difference? I don't know the laws.

My polling place doesn't ask for a picture ID.

If I were in a small town, though, and thought that showing up and voting would cause me to be arrested or hassled, I wouldn't do it. You might consider absentee ballot sent to a P.O. Box or a friend's house, though.

posted by small_ruminant 08 January | 14:09

So do either of you ever get into arguments with people to the left of you?

Not in person, no. In my head when I read one of the alt-weeklies, yes.

posted by occhiblu 08 January | 14:17

I think it's illegal in many places to require picture ID for voting; it disenfranchises a lot of vulnerable populations (the homeless, for instance, who may not be able to get a driver's license or anything requiring proof of address).

posted by occhiblu 08 January | 14:19

Box, I've seen pics of you in your beard thread. I'm very confused.

occhiblu and small ruminant, I also live in a very dark blue place, and while I am a liberal, the only people I generally encounter with whom I have significant disagreements on politics are far to the left of me. Since I've been here all my adult life, I've come to associate political arguments with having it out with left radicals.

posted by pieisexactlythree 08 January | 14:22

So do either of you ever get into arguments with people to the left of you?

Yes, often.

posted by small_ruminant 08 January | 14:47

Heh, box, I'm fairly certain I get it.

Also, eekacat, wow.

posted by CitrusFreak12 08 January | 16:17

FOR ANYONE WHO TOOK OFFENSE TO MY ORIGINAL POST OR COMMENTS IN THIS THREAD:

First of all, you're right. I did come off rather snarky and heavy-handed in my original post. This is from me not settling down before I type.

I honestly meant for there to be a discussion, and not come off like a hectoring and strident person. And especially not as someone who's blaming others.

What I've seen here has been fantastic. You all have really opened up and shared a lot of great stories, opinions and reactions to things you like and don't like about our political process. In short, you rewarded me in spades. It's times like this that I treasure what we have here in this community more than any other.

So bravo to all who have contributed to this thread, for whatever reason that made you take the time to write. It has meant a lot to me to watch this unfold.

Cheers, LT

posted by Lipstick Thespian 08 January | 18:30

Just in the interest of clarification: I'm in my 30s, and not a convicted felon. But here are my, uh, points: there are a lot of reasons that people might not vote. Some of them are better than others. The reasons, not the people.

posted by box 08 January | 23:19

07 January 2008