Obama vs. Romney

[Zaquis]

Originally Posted by Tom Breed

If every person eligible to vote (I think in 2008 it was something like 68% of eligible voters voted, and it's projected to be much lower this time around) that may be able to swing some states and swing an election!

yeah last time something like that happened the electoral college was basically like 'fuck you' and didn't care

[Breed]

when was that?

[Bobby Swisha]

1648

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1648

[Zaquis]

Originally Posted by Tom Breed

when was that?

2000

[Zaquis]

and 1992, to a lesser extent

[Breed]

Originally Posted by BR

yeah. but we know that's not going to happen. tom I don't mean to attack you but your posts in this thread are really dumb, are you just trolling?

haha, just trying to get people to talk about it. I'm interested to see what the community thinks this time around compared to 08.

[Damage Jackal]

Originally Posted by Zaquis

oh come on man the national elections are pointless in america unless you're in a swing state. we can't all have the brilliant voting system of australia

i don't know if you're being serious or not but i legit love australia's electoral system

[Zaquis]

i am 100% serious the american electoral system is a joke and australia has one of the most clever systems i've seen

[Aaron Haynes]

The electoral college sucks but I still think it's dumb not to participate.

[Phil Williamson]

I honestly can't imagine anyone here except for Adrian Pikios and Spencer Howell supporting Romney

[Zaquis]

Originally Posted by Aaron Haynes

The electoral college sucks but I still think it's dumb not to participate.

why? there is no 'abstain' option in america when you vote, unlike a lot of other countries, so the only way to protest is by not voting. also, what's the point of voting in a national election when your vote means squat anyway. what's the point of voting when it has no meaning? so you can feel smug or claim you 'tried' by doing the absolute bare minimum of empty gestures?

[Zaquis]

Originally Posted by Phil Williamson

I honestly can't imagine anyone here except for Adrian Pikios and Spencer Howell supporting Romney

i'll see if i can cook something up.... this will be my project

[Bobby Swisha]

Originally Posted by Zaquis

why? there is no 'abstain' option in america when you vote, unlike a lot of other countries, so the only way to protest is by not voting. also, what's the point of voting in a national election when your vote means squat anyway. what's the point of voting when it has no meaning? so you can feel smug or claim you 'tried' by doing the absolute bare minimum of empty gestures?

yeah it's essentially wasting 1-2 hours for nothing. I mean I've lived in Texas and Illinois, tell me why I should bother voting in those states?

[Aaron Haynes]

Originally Posted by Zaquis

why? there is no 'abstain' option in america when you vote, unlike a lot of other countries, so the only way to protest is by not voting. also, what's the point of voting in a national election when your vote means squat anyway. what's the point of voting when it has no meaning? so you can feel smug or claim you 'tried' by doing the absolute bare minimum of empty gestures?

Are you really making a principled stand by doing nothing? Protesting by just staying home and complaining "its all bullshit anyway"?

Even without the electoral college, your vote means pretty much squat. People could easily justify not voting just by looking at the polling information, "Obama is consistently ahead so my vote is not gonna tip the scales".

I don't see how not voting is in any way a "protest". If you ACTUALLY protest about it, organize a drive to get people to write-in "No Confidence" in large numbers and make that a news story, then it's a statement, but if you just sit home and sneer about it online, it's an empty gesture.

[Zaquis]

lol see why do liberals always think if you don't vote in national elections, which is almost entirely meaningless outside of major swing states, you're obviously some sneering lazy pothead slacktivist or something?? it's such a childish narrative

[Zaquis]

also most states have strict write-in laws and any that have something like "no confidence" will simply be tossed out by whoever's counting the ballot, and won't be entered into the poll

the entire national electoral system is set up to be an ineffective mess so that the two major parties can retain power. why is voting for either of them in a state where it probably won't count anyway some kind of moral imperative

[Aaron Haynes]

I didn't say anything like that. You're the one who said "the only way to protest is by not voting." "Not voting", just by itself, isn't a protest. When 35% of the country doesn't vote, it's not seen as some definitive protest of the process, or the candidates.

Not voting isn't a statement. It just means you didn't participate. If you actually follow up with more activism, that's another story.

BTW, I wasn't being smug or claiming it's a moral imperative, or that I'm doing all that should be expected of me. I just think people should vote. You sure are piling a lot of motivations into what I said.

[Zaquis]

i meant the only form of protest in the electoral process itself is by not voting, since there is no option on the actual ballot that acknowledges outright refusal to partake in it. and when 35% of the country doesn't vote, it partially IS because of the futility of the process. but people like you who push the narrative of not voting in national elections being 'dumb' just perpetuates the myth that people don't vote out of sheer laziness, which is very far from the truth most the time.

and i'll ask you again: why is it dumb to not partake in a process that is an empty, hopeless gesture anyway?

[Aaron Haynes]

Originally Posted by Zaquis

i meant the only form of protest in the electoral process itself is by not voting, since there is no option on the actual ballot that acknowledges outright refusal to partake in it. and when 35% of the country doesn't vote, it partially IS because of the futility of the process. but people like you who push the narrative of not voting in national elections being 'dumb' just perpetuates the myth that people don't vote out of sheer laziness, which is very far from the truth most the time.

Do you have a source for that? I'm not saying I believe everyone who doesn't vote does so out of laziness, but what's your basis for believing most of them have some kind of cogent feeling of protest behind it?

Not voting isn't a statement. Or at the very least, it's not a statement anyone can reliably interpret, and so if you're trying to make one, you're doing it a dumb way, and if you just think the process is pointless, then (if you're not engaging in some other form of activism or outreach on the subject) you're giving up.

[Zaquis]

this whole time you're assuming i don't partake in some other forms of activism or outreach or volunteering, which is untrue.

also, the source for that is the fact that felons aren't allowed to vote, and america has the highest amount of prisoners, both per capita and by sheer numbers. a lot of former felons also lose their right to vote. that's not even touching on the racial makeup of all these people who are denied their right to partake in the national electoral process. also, we are currently witnessing the most radical period on the ground in america that has occurred in, i'd say, half a century. with the wake of the occupy movement, massive waves of strikes, more and more americans identifying as 'socialist' or some other form, i highly doubt these people are just sitting on their asses being too lazy to vote.

but if that's not a good enough source, then i'll ask you to prove to me that your caricature of a non-voter is true then, and put is at a stalemate. i'm not saying every non-voter is making some grand statement by consciously not voting, but the fact that non-participation in voting, especially for the left-leaning americans, is so prevalent should show how futile the process seems to be.

and you still haven't answered my question about WHY it's dumb to not vote. you're attacking my original statement about not voting being the only form of legitimate form of protest in the electoral system, and have been shadowboxing with things i never said or extrapolating into weird tangents, while dancing around my actual points. how about you quit doing the ideological version of matrix bullet-dodging and actually stick to what you said and legitimately defend it originally instead of trying to nick cage my ass by burning me up in some giant strawman

[Aaron Haynes]

Originally Posted by Zaquis

this whole time you're assuming i don't partake in some other forms of activism or outreach or volunteering, which is untrue.

At no point have I been targeting you or saying you were being dumb/not being active.

also, the source for that is the fact that felons aren't allowed to vote, and america has the highest amount of prisoners, both per capita and by sheer numbers. a lot of former felons also lose their right to vote. that's not even touching on the racial makeup of all these people who are denied their right to partake in the national electoral process. also, we are currently witnessing the most radical period on the ground in america that has occurred in, i'd say, half a century. with the wake of the occupy movement, massive waves of strikes, more and more americans identifying as 'socialist' or some other form, i highly doubt these people are just sitting on their asses being too lazy to vote.

What percentage do you think they make up of the total number of non-voters? Realistically. I know a lot more that just don't want to wait in line because, even though they'd vote for a major party candidate, "what's the point, I don't live in a swing state". Collectively, they probably COULD swing the state. I know a bunch of people like that and I DO live in a swing state as of 2008, btw.

Anyway, it's impossible to know, because not voting isn't a proactive statement of any kind by itself. All we know is that a lot of people don't vote. We have a vague sense of dissatisfaction, but as yet it hasn't coalesced into a coherent, effective force. If it does, I'll be as happy as anyone, but you're the one making the argument that non-voters, for the most part, are representative of such a shift, and I don't think statistics (or results, or visibility) bear that out.

but if that's not a good enough source, then i'll ask you to prove to me that your caricature of a non-voter is true then, and put is at a stalemate. i'm not saying every non-voter is making some grand statement by consciously not voting, but the fact that non-participation in voting, especially for the left-leaning americans, is so prevalent should show how futile the process seems to be.

And yet, somehow it doesn't seem to be gaining much traction or having an actual effect on the process. It's almost as if no one can interpret the meaning behind the absence of a vote, by itself, which is the only thing I've been saying!

You're demanding I defend a caricature that you brought into the discussion, not me. I dunno who you're arguing with, but they're not here.

and you still haven't answered my question about WHY it's dumb to not vote.

Yes I did, because my statement was that it was dumb to JUST not vote. If you are not voting because you don't believe in the process and feel you can do more in other ways, that's a different story.

you're attacking my original statement about not voting being the only form of legitimate form of protest in the electoral system, and have been shadowboxing with things i never said or extrapolating into weird tangents, while dancing around my actual points. how about you quit doing the ideological version of matrix bullet-dodging and actually stick to what you said and legitimately defend it originally instead of trying to nick cage my ass by burning me up in some giant strawman

How about you address the actual statements I made instead of proxy-arguing with "people like you" and "so many liberals"? From the beginning you've insinuated all sorts of strawman arguments and narratives I've supposedly been pushing or contributing to. Like I'm obligated to justify the value of the electoral process in order to have my opinion that not participating in it isn't, by itself, some brave or respectable act.

[Zaquis]

ok i didn't feel like partaking too much in this debate but i got a bit more steam going now and will use more than just the prisoner example since that was weak in itself: but i could also touch on the community of immigrants who do not have citizenship but work in the US and can't vote, the gerrymandering occurs, the voter frauds or campaigns that specifically set out to disenfranchise lower-class communities and communities of color, and the fact that the american national elections constantly pander to the 'middle class' which is dwindling constantly, while the lower classes are completely ignored. and every time any third party candidate actually DOES gain some kind of running, they get railroaded. the voting system is, at best, hopelessly obsolete and i don't see how it's 'dumb' to not partake in it. if you think all felons, immigrants, communities of color, etc. are 'dumb' for not partaking in a system that barely acknowledges them to begin with, i dunno what to tell you man. i'm sure there are people who don't vote out of laziness, but i don't think that's the entire reason so many people don't vote, and i wouldn't paint everyone who doesn't vote as 'dumb' because that's simplistic and a somewhat condescending mindset

edit: oops you responded lol one sec

[Aaron Haynes]

if you think all felons, immigrants, communities of color, etc. are 'dumb' for not partaking in a system that barely acknowledges them to begin with, i dunno what to tell you man. i'm sure there are people who don't vote out of laziness, but i don't think that's the entire reason so many people don't vote, and i wouldn't paint everyone who doesn't vote as 'dumb' because that's simplistic and a somewhat condescending mindset

Like I keep saying, I'm not and never was saying anything like this. I agree with you that the system sucks, and that a ton of disenfranchised groups get shafted no matter what, and for a lot of people, their individual (or collective) vote won't change anything.

I don't think everyone who doesn't vote is dumb. I think not voting out of laziness, or not voting out of principle but not doing anything else about it is not particularly bold or useful. I used 'dumb' as a shortcut for saying that. I'm inclined to be more sympathetic to people in shitty conditions who really feel like it doesn't make any difference to their situation. But I don't think not voting makes that situation any better -- in fact, it probably makes it worse, because political parties start to write entire demographics off as unreliable and ignore them more.

I don't think voting is the answer or that it will make the big difference or it's all anyone needs to do. I think it's one tool out of many to get to a better system, and there are ways to use it effectively. A hammer would be better than a screwdriver for banging in a nail, but if a screwdriver is all you have, find a creative and effective way to use it rather than throw it out.

[Zaquis]

Originally Posted by Aaron Haynes

At no point have I been targeting you or saying you were being dumb/not being active.

i guess i've been interpreting the "you" you throw out as me specifically, and not in the general 'you' referring to the population in general. my bad.

What percentage do you think they make up of the total number of non-voters?

i believe around 7% of the american population has either been incarcerated or is on parole, but i don't have the numbers in front of me. but that's a pretty large number.

Realistically. I know a lot more that just don't want to wait in line because,even though they'd vote for a major party candidate, "what's the point, I don't live in a swing state". Collectively, they probably COULD swing the state. I know a bunch of people like that and I DO live in a swing state as of 2008, btw.

yes but many states have absentee ballots and the like. i don't even know anyone, except weird old people, who actually go out to the polls. and theoretically maybe these people could 'swing' a state but historically the electoral college has flipped the bird to voters numerous times and voted against what they said, nullifying their actions. wouldn't that make you feel disenfranchised?

Anyway, it's impossible to know, because not voting isn't a proactive statement of any kind by itself. All we know is that a lot of people don't vote. We have a vague sense of dissatisfaction, but as yet it hasn't coalesced into a coherent, effective force. If it does, I'll be as happy as anyone, but you're the one making the argument that non-voters, for the most part, are representative of such a shift, and I don't think statistics (or results, or visibility) bear that out.

actually it is possible to know, you just have to be out on the ground talking to people. there have been people going out and third party candidates gaining traction, but the system is specifically set up to deny them any representation or traction. i've worked with plenty of people who, at best, begrudgingly vote democrat simply because they don't want to help the republican candidate, but are mad that any other vote they do will just basically get tossed out.

And yet, somehow it doesn't seem to be gaining much traction or having an actual effect on the process. It's almost as if no one can interpret the meaning behind the absence of a vote, by itself, which is the only thing I've been saying!

but other things are happening. i just pointed out that there are tons of social movements gaining steam on the ground. i never stated that not voting in and of itself is an ultimate form of protest. i simply said that it is the only LEGITIMATE protest within the electoral system. there are tons of other things going on in the country outside of the electoral sphere that signify people are highly dissatisfied with the national electoral process. you must have blinders on if you think why so many people don't vote is a total mystery.

You're demanding I defend a caricature that you brought into the discussion, not me. I dunno who you're arguing with, but they're not here.
Yes I did, because my statement was that it was dumb to JUST not vote. If you are not voting because you don't believe in the process and feel you can do more in other ways, that's a different story.

again, i am not saying that everyone who doesn't vote is doing it out of some noble activist protest, but rather is not voting simply out of cynicism for the system itself. i'm not saying not voting is the beginning, but rather the end. the broken system leads to not voting, it is a symptom of a greater problem, it is not the instigator.

How about you address the actual statements I made instead of proxy-arguing with "people like you" and "so many liberals"? From the beginning you've insinuated all sorts of strawman arguments and narratives I've supposedly been pushing or contributing to. Like I'm obligated to justify the value of the electoral process in order to have my opinion that not participating in it isn't, by itself, some brave or respectable act.

i never said it was some brave or respectable act dude. cut that out. i simply was pointing out originally that not voting can be the only legitimate form of protest in the electoral process and ALSO and am elaborating and saying that i completely understand why people don't vote. what is the point of voting when you dislike both candidates, and know who you do like won't go anywhere? i'm simply displaying that the system is awful and don't see why it's 'dumb' as you said, to not partake in it. i voted third party in 2008, and will probably vote third party this election, but i have absolutely zero faith in it until it gets seriously re-designed.

i'm coming from the pretense that the american national elections have an awful, broken voting system that actually goes against actual democracy and suffocates real discourse. if you don't believe this than i guess this debate is a waste of time because i don't see the point in partaking in something that is uselessly broken and why it is 'dumb' to not partake in it

[Zaquis]

Originally Posted by Aaron Haynes

Like I keep saying, I'm not and never was saying anything like this. I agree with you that the system sucks, and that a ton of disenfranchised groups get shafted no matter what, and for a lot of people, their individual (or collective) vote won't change anything.

I don't think everyone who doesn't vote is dumb. I think not voting out of laziness, or not voting out of principle but not doing anything else about it is not particularly bold or useful. I used 'dumb' as a shortcut for saying that. I'm inclined to be more sympathetic to people in shitty conditions who really feel like it doesn't make any difference to their situation. But I don't think not voting makes that situation any better -- in fact, it probably makes it worse, because political parties start to write entire demographics off as unreliable and ignore them more.

I don't think voting is the answer or that it will make the big difference or it's all anyone needs to do. I think it's one tool out of many to get to a better system, and there are ways to use it effectively. A hammer would be better than a screwdriver for banging in a nail, but if a screwdriver is all you have, find a creative and effective way to use it rather than throw it out.

well i guess we are simply talking past in each other than in the sense that we're both taking points we made out of context or misinterpreting them because i've been running this whole time on your original post which is this:

The electoral college sucks but I still think it's dumb not to participate.

because i think that's a very stupid statement to make.

and concerning your hammer metaphor (i hate arguing with metaphors btw so i'll prob drop it after this before it gets convoluted and dumb) it's not that people don't have a hammer, and are forced to use the screwdriver, it's that getting a hammer is going to be much more difficult and it is frustrating to use a screwdriver.

i think the fault of most americans, especially liberals or left-leaning people, is that they think voting is a form of activism, i guess. voting, i'd argue, isn't a form of activism. it is, at best, a telos or signifier of all the previous discourses, struggles, and activism that lead up to it. and when the form of voting in itself is corrupted and toxic, then you have to change the ballot, not begrudgingly put a checkmark on it and hope maybe it'll be better next election cycle.

am i making sense? i'm trashed and distracted atm so if i'm being convoluted or incoherent i'm sorry, but i guess i'm trying again and again to emphasize that voting in and of itself isn't really important, and to turn it into a simple dichotomy between voting and not voting doesn't work because you can't ignore the bigger problems and questions that circle around it.

and this isn't a question to sneer or act like you know nothing, i'm really curious: do you know the history of third parties and the like in american politics? it's not like americans just don't WANT to vote third party or whatever, people are only given two options (often which don't matter since the electoral college sucks) because the two other parties actively sabotage the process that we use to elect them. independents have gained a lot of traction before, but they always get hammered down. i think we need to look outside the sphere of voting, and consider voting in itself our last priority. voting is the end, not the means.