Do you vote?
- Thread starter KeyMaster45
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Point, actually... One side is making big dosh on people that aren't like them and the other is too concerned with individual prestige to put up a fight. What happened, Left? It used to be about the people!Acrisius said:
But still, it'd be even less of a hope of ever changing that if I didn't try.Another reason that I vote. People were prepared to get mowed down by the royal army to ensure that I could vote once upon a time. It would feel a bit unfair to them to just not do it.FamoFunk said:
...And just because this kind of leaps out to me: no. Obama is not a socialist. Whatever he is, a socialist is certainly not that.NotSoLoneWanderer said:
I do. and in the US, you don't need to spoil the ballet, you can write in a nonsense vote. Mickey mouse is a popular protest vote. Also, 30 percent of american voters have no physical ballet to spoil. 30% of US votes are counted by electronic machines with no paper record to spoil. 60% are counted by electronic voting machines.Kaytastrophe said:I don't know how many people will read this but let me offer those of you who don't want to vote because you don't like any of the candidates a suggestion. Vote but abstain (or spoil your ballet). When the government sees that you didn't vote they see you as just being lazy or indifferent and as such they are not going to try and get you to vote for them because you're seen as lazy and an absentee voter. You never made your voice heard you gave up your say. However if you spoil your ballet you clearly put the effort into researching candidates and still went to vote but voted for no one because you didn't like any of the candidates. How legitimate would it look if lets say 100% of the nation voted in an election and the winning party got 30% of the total votes, opposition 20% and 50% spoiled or abstained. By spoiling instead not voting your showing an interest in politics and exercising your vote however none of the candidates appealed to you. That's just my opinion.
This is on the second page of the thread though...and no one reads the second page
"crazyness is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results" can't disagree, voting is never a waste of time. You only have the rights you are willing to fight for.saint of m said:
Not really. I would argue not only that both are equally equal, but further: if you have the choice between getting murdered or getting raped, what do you choose? I choose to run away or fight back. There are other options. 3rd party. Write in. And they aren't pipe dreams anymore. You don't need the deep pockets of a political party to win an election anymore, thanks to the internet you could run a decent campaign for free. Youtube and facebook is more than enough to reach the masses, and both are free. The world is changing, we need to shed our assumptions about politics that were made during an era without the internet. The internet has changed everything, especially politics.KeyMaster45 said:
I grew up watching the shit storm that Florida made during the Bush/Gore election. I argued with my parents that Bush shouldn't be elected because he didn't win the popular vote. As in more people voted for Gore, but because Bush won the electoral vote he got into office.
I still vote, because while I find many aspects of this country disgusting I am still one of its citizens and should do my duty as an American.
Besides I have no right to ***** about a president, when I never voted in their election.
I still vote, because while I find many aspects of this country disgusting I am still one of its citizens and should do my duty as an American.
Besides I have no right to ***** about a president, when I never voted in their election.
If you don't vote, YOU are the problem. Not the politicians, not the special interest groups and not the lobbyists, YOU. You're the reason my generation constantly gets crapped on by policy makers. You're the reason OWS is laughed at by congressmen. You're the reason why I have to pay for tax breaks for hedge fund managers. It's your fault my country is fubar, no one else's.
Stop whining, stop playing the victim, stop being a narcissistic prick, and just go vote. Get your whiny narcissistic friends to vote too.
Do you know why government works for old people and not young people? They vote.
We could be a powerful voting block. We could get our voices heard. Want a more equitable distribution of funds for primary education? Vote. Want more government assistance for higher ed programs? Vote. Complaining gets you nothing.
Stop whining, stop playing the victim, stop being a narcissistic prick, and just go vote. Get your whiny narcissistic friends to vote too.
Do you know why government works for old people and not young people? They vote.
We could be a powerful voting block. We could get our voices heard. Want a more equitable distribution of funds for primary education? Vote. Want more government assistance for higher ed programs? Vote. Complaining gets you nothing.
Not everyone understood what his spending plans were when he was campaigning. I'm being serious. My mother abstained from voting and my father voted for Obama. My cousin didn't care either way but I convinced him to vote McCain. Not ideal but good enough.Gerishnakov said:
I like many others live in the UK and have voted once and tbh it was pretty boring (dont know what I was expecting though) and why the hell isnt there a box saying none of the above it just seemed I was given an ultimatum rather than a choice.
Last few times I havent bothered im not a huge fan of politics it bores me rigid and people get really snarky about it although that does make them easy to rile up which can be fun still the system seems to be doing fine without me, no matter who you vote for the government always gets in anyway.
Oh and if anyone takes politics seriously saying that last phrase to them will cause their mind to momentarily disassemble is kinda fun if you want to see some fallout (and dont mind being lectured), man do they get defensive.
Last few times I havent bothered im not a huge fan of politics it bores me rigid and people get really snarky about it although that does make them easy to rile up which can be fun still the system seems to be doing fine without me, no matter who you vote for the government always gets in anyway.
Oh and if anyone takes politics seriously saying that last phrase to them will cause their mind to momentarily disassemble is kinda fun if you want to see some fallout (and dont mind being lectured), man do they get defensive.
Obama is pro college. McCain less so. Would things be better for college kids under McCain? Sometimes it's not the voting it's the candidates that represent your values. Besides, I foresee a lot of spending cuts in the future assuming Obama isn't elected again. The next few years won't be the greatest for college students. Besides there are bigger problems. Trillions in debt and people want more spending while reducing the deficit?Michaluk said:
Let's see; 3 parties, one of whom is never capable of winning and has now denigrated themselves as the nation's Judas, so that leaves me with the Conservatives and Labour. I'm sure to be rewarded with incompetence abound with either choice, but at least given my general centre left leanings, I'll find the latter a hell of a lot more palatable. Lesser of two evils and all that, essentially my vote was cast more so keep the Tory's out rather than to keep Labour [i/]in[/i]. But what can you do? Apparently Cameron just isn't transparent enough and the working class are fucking masochists, easily led astray by demagogic rhetoric. >.> You've got nothing to lose, yet very little to gain, but some chance is better than no chance and that feeble strand of hope is essentially my reason for voting.
But again, it doesn't really provide any evidence for Obama being a socialist. It's really rather peculiar from an international perspective.NotSoLoneWanderer said:
Nope, I'm 17, however I also have no intention of voting. I don't agree with this kind of government system, it doesn't work as well as everybody thinks it does. It's the fallout of the 20th century, everybody still fucks democracy up the arse and thinks there are no improvements to be made.
Well there's no concrete evidence of him being socialist but many of his spending policies are just so...welfare state-y. Redistribution of wealth is especially moronic. He doesn't understand business very well which is what made America so rich in the first place. Socialist may not have been the word but if anything Obama is suitable as a "good times" president. Perfect for if much of America's problems were solved. He's not a problem solving president. My point is welfare state=bad. Just look at Greece.Muspelheim said:
I'm Welsh and I vote every time I can. I have never voted for anyone who has won. I tend to prefer a spine in my candidates. Several times I've spoilt my ballot out of disgust. N/A (or some variation) should appear so that peoples dislike of available candidates can be counted better.
What's keeping you from voting Lib Dem? We've already covered earlier in the thread how you don't vote for a party in the UK, you vote for your MP, so it depends where you live for the Lib Dems to have a chance of 'winning'. If everyone who could elect a Lib Dem MP did so there'd probably be over 100 of them.OmniscientOstrich said:
High spending does not a socialist make. GW Bush was one of the highest spending presidents of the modern era.NotSoLoneWanderer said:
Welfare state = bad? The UK, France, and Germany all have a form of welfare state that far outdoes anything the US has ever instituted. I can also point out that the UK has never had a truly socialist government. Labour may call itself socialist, but it has always been much closer to merely the far left of social democracy.NotSoLoneWanderer said:
Greece is not a good example of anything, except skapegoats.
Sir, you are so ill informed about the nature of the welfare state, the problems of lopsided economies and their social effects, what socialism is, and the problems affecting Greece (I mean more than just reading a newspaper once in a while), that it is difficult to know where to begin correcting the flaws in your knowledge and logic.NotSoLoneWanderer said:
No it doesn't. Would you really argue that Margaret Thatcher was a socialist? Thatcher kept on funding the UK's national (though you would probably call it 'socialised') health service and welfare state, with perhaps some minor cuts to the latter. That system still carries on receiving funding today. In fact, social welfare is the single biggest recipient of UK government funds. Would you call our current government socialist?NotSoLoneWanderer said: