This November, stay home.

[Jesda]

I disagree with the idea that people who abstain from voting are somehow less patriotic. Maybe these people haven't spent enough time learning about politics, economics, or even follow the news enough to make an informed decision. Maybe they don't like ANY of the candidates. Maybe they feel that other voters can make more informed choices. Maybe they believe neither candidate will affect them enough to justify choosing one over the other.

Regardless, they are not unpatriotic, and the act of voting does not make one more American. Its an informed vote that counts. Like free speech, you have a right to exercise it, but you can mind yourself and stay quiet if you wish.

I despise the compulsory voting that takes place in some European countries + Australia.

Most importantly, my vote is more powerful when fewer people participate. I take the time to acquire knowledge and information and debate/discuss these things with the people around me. My vote is more informed.

America, stay home this November. Let Jesda choose the next president for you.

[AZhitman]

"You have the right to remain silent."

The Supremem Court was brilliant when it drafted Miranda.

[srellim234]

It's amazing how many people need to have their rights as a voter explained to them. Over the years I've explained to many people that it's not mandatory to vote for every single office or initiative on the ballot. Just vote on the ones you are comfortable voting on.

If you have a local issue like the school board that is important to you, you can vote on that one and skip the rest if you want. Far too many people don't understand that they can leave a slot blank and the rest of their votes still count.

[Cold_Zero]

Your post reminds me of an interview I heard today with Steve Inskeep from NPR interviewing Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.http://www.npr.org/templates/s...87472

NPR: I'm not saying don't say anything else; I'm saying our time is limited. You mentioned, Mr. President — you mentioned elections. You mentioned a referendum, which raises another question in my mind.

Iran's democracy, Iran's elections have a feature that is different from the United States, that we should explain.

In Iran, the government disqualifies many candidates, sometimes thousands of candidates, if they do not have what is considered to be the appropriate beliefs. They are not permitted to run.

Why do you not trust Iran's people to make that choice, instead of the government making it for them?

Ahmadinejad: I, in fact, believe that elections in Iran are among the freest in the world. There's at least 100 times more freedom in Iran than there is in the United States.

NPR: Why don't you trust people to vote for everybody?

Ahmadinejad: We trust people! Elections are free in Iran!

NPR: After the candidate rolls are removed.

Ahmadinejad: It's the restrictions here that exist — we have a law in Iran. According to the law, whoever possesses qualifications to become a candidate can run — for example for the presidential elections.

A clear example of the confidence we place in the people is I, myself. I didn't belong to any party. I taught at the university.

NPR: And if your supreme leader didn't want you to run, you would not run.

Ahmadinejad: No, not at all. There were seven other candidates…

NPR: Permitted.

Ahmadinejad: Eight candidates —

NPR: Who were permitted. In legislative elections, thousands were disqualified.

Ahmadinejad: From many different groups and parties. Even independents. Free assorted [indecipherable] campaigns. The national TV actually gave time to all of them equally. I was an independent candidate, without any party affiliations. Only the academics supported me. And I was voted into office. And now I'm the president. I ask you, can anyone in fact become a president without the support of either of the two parties here in the United States?

NPR: Anyone may put his name on the ballot in the United States.

Ahmadinejad: Are 300 million people here in America members of either of the two parties? No, not necessarily. People have no other choices here. You only have two choices. In Iran, at least, we have eight. Who is more free? Who has more confidence in its people?

NPR: Eight people in the political spectrum from about here to here, and I'm holding my finger an inch apart. If I may ask one more question, if I might, Mr. President.

Ahmadinejad: So then, you do agree there are restrictions, even farther here in the United States and elsewhere?

NPR: I do not agree. The United States — the American system has its own problems, which we may discuss in another interview. I would look forward to the discussion.

Ahmadinejad: Why do you assume that your system is better than everybody else's?

NPR: I assume nothing, Mr. President, I ask questions.

To get back to your post, Jesda. I find it interesting that exercising the right to vote is Patriotic, but exercising your right to bare arms is "dangerous." I personally think handing people a ballot and telling them to go vote (with out any preparation) is dangerous.

[HashiriyaS14]

I think that abstaining from the ballot is just fine, so long as you abstain with full knowledge of the consequences.

Each disenfranchised Republican who stays home, for instance, particularly in swing states (like MO), should know that they are effectively voting Democrat. Additionally, each disenfranchised Republican who votes for Barr in a swing state is effectively doing the same thing.

Yes, a vote for Barr or Nader makes a statement, but the statement and the impact of the vote are not the same thing. The statement is FOR Barr and against both parties, the IMPACT is most definitely Pro-Democrat.

Obviously, this would go the same way with, for instance, a disenfranchised Democrat in PA voting for Nader or staying home. This person IS, inescapably, voting for McCain, albeit indirectly. So long as they are okay with this, it's all good.

I, for instance, sincerely hope that Jesda convinces a great many Missouri Republicans to vote for Bob Barr. It's inching towards being seriously in play.

[Cold_Zero]

And sometimes (maybe not know) I think when your party has been hijacked by certain elements or lost its fundamentals/core principals (this applies to both sides) sending a message loud and clear is much better than voting for your party's candidate. If you keep voting for your party’s candidate by shear fact of not allowing the other party to win, it sends a message to the National Committee that all is well and keep doing what you are doing. Sometimes you need a bit of tough love to get what you want. The two big examples are the 1994 Congressional Election-Contract With America and the 2006 General Elections.Bud

[Encryptshun]

While I agree whole-heartedly that voting does not make one "more patriotic" -- I absolutely lay the smack-down on anyone who bishez about government without exercising his or her right to participate in its function. i.e. if you don't vote, don't *****.

You are either part of a solution or you aren't. Pick which one and own up to your decision after the fact.

[APEXi240]

While I agree whole-heartedly that voting does not make one "more patriotic" -- I absolutely lay the smack-down on anyone who bishez about government without exercising his or her right to participate in its function. i.e. if you don't vote, don't *****.

You are either part of a solution or you aren't. Pick which one and own up to your decision after the fact.

But why vote if my vote does not count on the national, state, county, and even municipal level? So I am not allowed to criticize or express concerns because I choose not to participate in an electoral system in which my participation is inconsequential?

In fact "b**ching" is the only thing that you can do. By that term I mean, using constructive criticism and activism to make public concerns you have with your government and elected officials.

[96Qowner]

But why vote if my vote does not count on the national, state, county, and even municipal level?

Because you only learn that it didn't matter after the votes have been counted. If 100,000 people make the same decision not to vote, collectively, they could have mattered.

As long as you know what you want and are educated about the issues, you should vote.

[Encryptshun]

But why vote if my vote does not count on the national, state, county, and even municipal level? So I am not allowed to criticize or express concerns because I choose not to participate in an electoral system in which my participation is inconsequential?

In fact "b**ching" is the only thing that you can do. By that term I mean, using constructive criticism and activism to make public concerns you have with your government and elected officials.

By "b*tch" I mean more people who just complain about how things work rather than suggesting ways to improve the situation, rather than trying to write or meeting with their Congresspeople and voice legitimate grievances, and who spend their energy slamming the current administration/congress/SCOTUS for being inept, corrupt, etc. without a real knowledge of or attempt to self-educate on the issues.

I know several people who just complain and complain about everything, yet when I ask them if they vote, their answer is "no, I don't bother." That's the sort of attitude I was commenting on.

[AZhitman]

...and of course, none of them are involved in any type of political activity, either.

They discredit that which they do not comprehend.

[APEXi240]

Because you only learn that it didn't matter after the votes have been counted. If 100,000 people make the same decision not to vote, collectively, they could have mattered.

As long as you know what you want and are educated about the issues, you should vote.

My state has not voted Republican since '88 (in presidential elections), and actually the trend for Democratic voting is expected to continue. The county I live in is notoriously Democratic, and the town that I live in is completely Democratic. There are two local Democratic parties that have controlled the town for over 15 years. My father actually changed from a Republican to Democrat to run for election on the town council.

And I couldn't even begin to talk to you about the political machine that is the Democratic party in my county.

I learned long ago that my vote does not count.

[96Qowner]

Heheh, hey I sympathize. My State hasn't voted Democrat for President since they rejected Goldwater, but it's voted Democrat for Senator and Rep since the 70s - very frustrating. Our Rep is a twerpy tinydicked little weenie that no one could possibly be proud of, but we keep electing him every 2 years - go figure.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsHIzokHlNk

But, alas, the guy who's been running against him is even worse, so I just don't vote for either. I always vote for a Republican Senator, though.

Actually, if the point spread narrows, NJ might be in play - ya never know. Vote for McCain and see what happens. There might actually be enough people in NJ that think it would be a bad idea to elect an inexperienced guy in these scary times. NJ folks are pretty bright.

[spngr311]

The reason is that people just select the incumbent when they have no real opinion. Also, I'm not a big fan of voting down party lines (I generally like Senator Bill Nelson, but I also like McCain and Jeb Bush was a good governor), however, I understand that if you do not know all the candidates, the party gives you an idea of what their values will mostly align with.

I've been thinking about taking/preaching a more anarchist approach to voting. If you are unhappy with the way the government is going and don't know every thing about the candidates, vote against the incumbent, regardless of party. It forces change regardless of what it can be and gives the government a chance to freshen up!

[szh]

While I agree whole-heartedly that voting does not make one "more patriotic"

Also agreed!

-- I absolutely lay the smack-down on anyone who bishez about government without exercising his or her right to participate in its function. i.e. if you don't vote, don't *****.

EXACTLY right!!!!

This is what I have said repeatedly in the past. When I talk politics with anyone (or somebody who is complaining and whining about the government), one of my first questions to them is "Were you eligible to vote the last time, and did you exercise that right?"

Regardless of whether their choice/person/party won or not, if they did not vote, then as far as I am concerned, I refuse to accept their right to whine (or PRAISE, for that matter!) about political matters. I will not discuss thse issues with them.

Z

[HashiriyaS14]

Regardless of whether their choice/person/party won or not, if they did not vote, then as far as I am concerned, I refuse to accept their right to whine (or PRAISE, for that matter!) about political matters. I will not discuss thse issues with them.

Absolutely.

BS about how "all the candidates were criminals" or whatever is totally invalid. Life isn't perfect and neither are the choices we are often faced with. It's the responsibility of each eligible citizen to do their own due diligence and arrive at a sensible, well-researched conclusion from among the available options.

You can opt out, and I'm against compulsory voting (even though it would help the Democrats), but if you don't vote, you can't complain, period.

[Jesda]

No.

If you don't vote, you are choosing to decline all of the above. You are not required to pick from the worst if you do not want to.

Aside from voting, you can work for interest groups, donate to politically active organizations, etc. Joining the NRA, AARP is arguably even more effective than voting, as the funds collected from membership purchase influence from elected politicians and spread the agenda.

"Okay, I have here three jugs of spoiled milk. Pick one to purchase and drink, or I will pick for you."

'But they're all disgusting. You might as well just pick one for me.'

So does this mean that because Person B declines to choose a particular flavor of spoiled milk, he can't complain about it? There is no logic in the assertion that voting validates one's right to complain. If someone dislikes all of the candidates and opts out, their non-selection is equally valid, as none of the candidates have earned their vote.

If you don't buy pizza at all, it means Pizza Hut and Dominoes have failed to earn your business. It does not mean you lose the ability to complain about how much you dislike pizza.

[marlin29311]

Actually, if the point spread narrows, NJ might be in play - ya never know. Vote for McCain and see what happens. There might actually be enough people in NJ that think it would be a bad idea to elect an inexperienced guy in these scary times. NJ folks are pretty bright.

While I agree and hope that NJ does decide to finally get it's head out of it's *** and stop voting for dumbasses like John Corzine (I cannot think of a governor that has been worse for our state), NJ has some pretty dumb people. Seriously. And a lot of "immigrants."