Proposal
1. Keep a list of every US citizen of voting age who makes a post to the effect of "I won't be voting this november"
2. Ban them from World Events.
Actually, this is a thread about voter apathy. People want change, but refuse to vote. What do they expect to happen?
What if no candidates are worth voting for? I likely won't be voting. I can't vote for a "lesser of two evils" with a clear conscience. Does that mean I'm forbidden from discussing the subject? What if I'm not informed? Should I vote anyways, just because I have some kind of duty to do so? An uninformed vote is worse than no vote at all, in my opinion. And how do those uninformed people become informed, if not by talking about politics with other people? There are more reasons that people don't vote than apathy.
Proposal: Only biologists, doctors, and people who donate money to cancer-curing charity organizations can talk about cancer from now on.
Proposal: End private funding for campaigns, thus allowing more than two candidates to have a chance to be elected in America.
Take care all.
Proposal: Bush will rig the election again, don't bother voting.
Well, if I lived in US, I'd certainly vote Kerry, since I believe Bush has screwed up nicely. Still, well, in another case where things were more stable, I'd give a blank vote, I'd actually like something like what Saramago proposed in his last book.
I have no interest in politics or the like. I trust that whoever is in charge of whichever municipal/federal/state/provincial job is qualified for it, or at the very least will not screw everybody over due to horrendous ineptitude. Since no one leader can possibly be responsible for the entire downfall of the country (at least in theory), I don't see why voting does anything.
I also don't actively complain about my government, even though it's my right/ability/freedom/whatever. I voted only once, and I don't even remember why I did. I remember haphazardly randomly picking names. That's no way to vote.
As Americans we are suppose to vote, but I can see where some of y'all come from. But, if you don't think that person is fit to run our country, and don't vote, that's fine. In fact I would encourage it. You dont trust the guy, or you don't have much info about him. Therefor you can't really make a rightous vote. But just cause someone does not vote, does not mean he can't discuss the matter, He can give a reason why didn't vote.
P.S. I hate politics, they are all crooks in my opinion.
Sin without deceivers
A God with no believers
I could sail by
on the Winds of Silence
And maybe they won't notice
But this time I think
It'd be better if I swim
Unne, thank you for reading my mind.
And besides, silence can be just as powerful a statement as words. Thus, as long as theres no one worth voting for I won't vote. Its not apathy.
And not to be rude, but just as most of the posters prior to me have already demonstrated, your proposal is obsurd.
I like Kung-Fu.
OK, how about if a person doesn't vote, he or she can't complain about the current president?
ARGUMENT FROM GUITAR MASTERY
(1) Eric Clapton is God.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
Proposal: Nuke all politicians and start over again.
Yes, people want change, but very few governments actually bring it. Voters realize this, and refuse to support either party, reasoning that neither will fulfil their promises anyway.
In Britain, the Conservative Party lost it's position of power almost a decade ago, and Tony Blair's Labour party was elected in a landslide victory. Now, everyone is sick of Labour, and the Conservatives are set to take power again. Once they are elected, the same will inevitably happen to them, and Labour will retake power. The two keep on switching places, each losing popularity, and then regaining it as their opponent's government fails. Knowing this, why should people vote for either of them?
"The most important and recognize player in the history of the country."
Sometimes I wonder what my life would be like if I were as great as Paulo Wanchope.
No. You can't know exactly what a person will do when voted in. By that logic, unless you voted AGAINST the current president, you shouldn't complain. I don't think that's right. Your voting has nothing to do with whether the action is complaint worthy or not.Originally Posted by DocFrance
Of course. I know little anarchists that vote, yet they are critical to the leaders.
Blank vote dosen't sound better?And besides, silence can be just as powerful a statement as words. Thus, as long as theres no one worth voting for I won't vote. Its not apathy.
If someone's completely dissilusioned with all candidates and refuses to vote, they can then deny having any active responsibility if the next government is a disasater.
I voted in the last general election here; I knew that they weren't going to win, but I agreed with their policies. A wasted vote, perhaps, since it didn't change anything... but if everyone took that approach, then nobody would vote and nothing would get done.
Refusing to vote, I think, doesn't disbar someone from commenting on political matters; just like conscientious objection doesn't mean you can't have a valid opinion on war. We're all affected by the outcomes, whether we're a part of the process or not.
Posting Permissions
