Your Civic Duty?

[Lady Dragonfly]

Voting is considered one of the main characteristic of democracy and a civic duty of every citizen. However, voter turnout is on decline.
In some countries participation is still high, e.g. Australia’s is 95% because of the compulsory voting.
This thread is about your personal voting attitude.

Please share your thoughts.

[Silur]

Voting is a duty for every citizen in a democracy, but by the look of things it might be pretty pointless in some places...

[url="http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/evoting.ars"]http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/evoting.ars[/url]

[fable]

I don't vote, because I believe the two party, party-that-wins-takes-all system in use in most states, districts, and in the federal system of the United States is totally unrealistic and anti-democratic. And as long as it lasts, government in the US will merely stagger from King Log to King Stork, and back again, with very few exceptions. At any rate, that's my opinion. Were there any possibility of breaking things open, of turning this into a proportionately representative system, I wouldn't simply vote, I'd probably take an active part in politics.

[Sean The Owner]

im too young still, but when i am old enough i will be voting on what would be the best for me, since its my vote and i feel it should be used on what i want, not other people, for the last few years ive found the PC(ontario, canada) was the best for me due to extra funds into post-secondary schooling...

[Sparrow]

Other (because it's rigged). There's no reason to vote until we switch to paper ballots, and outlaw electronic voting. But we're getting more and more areas using these machines.

[Mr_Snow]

Australia has compulsory voting (which I agree with) so there's not much decline here (there might be an increase in donkey voting though )

And I used to vote for minor parties/independants but as I've gotten older I've stopped doing so because I feel they don't add much to the process and would never be the government some poeple think they could be.
Now I vote for the party I feel reflects my viewpoint (obliviously not on every issue, but more broadly) best, also the fact that I don't agree with the backers of the other party and some of the stuff they have done in the past.

[Philos]

Although in some cases I feel I am choosing the lesser of two evils, I try to get informed about the candidates and base my vote on who I think might at least make a decent attempt at bettering things. In some cases in local elections I feel that my vote has meant something. Not so much on the national level though. Another reason I vote is that my state will quite often put propositions or measures on the ballot. As close to a true democracy as we can get I guess these days.

[stanolis]

i rarely vote because my vote nevers matters and every candidate is the same. my parents always vote though. weird.

if i actually thought my vote mattered, i'd vote more.

good call, sparrow: i saw them getting hacked on some tv program.

[Magrus]

I refuse to vote until someone that actually is a person I would trust to improve the country and my way of life runs for office. As every politician I have heard of or seen since I was born has been a power-hungry scum bag, I do not vote, and do not plan to do so in the near future. The system is broken in this country, and until it is fixed, I've better luck tossing pennies into the fountain at the mall and wishing for a good president than voting for one.

[Silur]

Other (because it's rigged). There's no reason to vote until we switch to paper ballots, and outlaw electronic voting. But we're getting more and more areas using these machines.

Maybe you should take up on Putin's offer? He was kind enough to suggest sending election supervisors through the UN, and he would be glad to provide such service to the US if they had problems with their elections. Come to think of it, it's not such a bad idea.

I think all of you who don't vote make a terrible mistake, since even though the choice is between awful scumbag and hitler wannabe you can be certain that the people voting for the _greater_ evil aren't sitting at home disillusioned by the system. In short, by doing nothing you are promoting the bad guy.

[fable]

Think of it this way: I don't think a good 30% of the 50% who can and regularly do vote in the US still understand exactly what Bush and his cronies have done to the US and the world. While I fully expect they never will care about the latter--many people never perceive anybody's suffering, except their own--the former needs to be brought home to them. And 2 more years of a lapdog legislature yes-ing everything Bush asks for will definitely help open some of those eyes. It might even take another 4 neo-con presidency years before they get the big picture, and kick the scoundrels out for a generation.

I don't mean this as a joke. The Democrats are still by and large a bunch of spineless mediocrities, and I don't want them in power over a traffic light, much less anything else. But the Republicans have shown an utter disregard for separation of church and state, separation of the branches of government, the rights of the citizenry, the economy, human rights in general, and a deeply rotted moral core that makes a nice aesthetic contrast next to their gleaming pronouncements of religious purity. None of this has yet dawned on many Americans, fed on a diet of bread and circuses. Things will probably have to appear that much worse before they conceive of how bad it is, and start looking sluggishly for remedies.

[Silur]

Trust me on this, Fable, it will never happen. No matter how bad the current government messes things up, it is the nature of politics that they a) succeed in pinning it on the opposition, b) find an external enemy that overshadows everything else (good work being done on this one atm) and c) more bread and circus. People adapt. What seems to be the most horrid time ever today, will be the good old times of tomorrow. You were around during the Reagan years. Did they change anything? It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the Republicans secure majority in congress again, even without cheating. The problem with waiting is that when you finally end up being right, the entire planet may very well look like Saudi Arabia. Even then, bread and circus will work wonders for keeping reality from disturbing most people's vision of the world.

[moltovir]

@Fable: as the saying goes, isn't it better to choose the lesser of two evils? Surely you do not think that say, Al Gore, would have done worse than Bush? I understand your reasons not to vote, but if I were a US citizen I'd still vote for the Democrats rather than not vote at all, because either the democrats or the republicans are going to win anyway, and it's better if the winner is the one
who is sure to cause the least damage. A mediocre government is still better than an utterly bad one. Just my POV though.

[dragon wench]

I selected the first option (I usually vote after considerable research). Fifteen, ten, or even five, years ago I might have said I don't vote because there is nobody really worth voting for and that doing so just supports an inherently flawed political structure.

However, the reality is that I'm a minority, and my refusal to vote changes absolutely nothing. *sigh*
So, I suppose I have adopted something of a "pragmatic" approach. Seeing as somebody is going to acquire power, regardless of my personal opinions on voting, I support the candidate that most closely represents my views. Or, sometimes, I even vote strategically.
Several federal elections back, for example, the Conservative candidate in my area was a far right Christian fundamentalist. Instead of voting for the New Democrat candidate (which would have been my first choice), I voted for the Liberal. Why? Because the Liberal had the best chance of defeating the Conservative, and it was a close race.

Also... given the struggle women went through to obtain the right to vote I'm not comfortable with forfeiting that right.

[Moonbiter]

@Fable: as the saying goes, isn't it better to choose the lesser of two evils? Surely you do not think that say, Al Gore, would have done worse than Bush? I understand your reasons not to vote, but if I were a US citizen I'd still vote for the Democrats rather than not vote at all, because either the democrats or the republicans are going to win anyway, and it's better if the winner is the one
who is sure to cause the least damage. A mediocre government is still better than an utterly bad one. Just my POV though.

I totally agree. But seeing the way the current election race is being conducted in the US, I have no problem understanding why people are staying home. How can anyone take this thing seriously? There are things being said that would put the speaker in jail in my country! What I find interesting is that this is happening in a country where lawsuits seems to be the national pastime, but all rules seem to be suspended during elections...

[fable]

@Fable: as the saying goes, isn't it better to choose the lesser of two evils?

A mediocre government in a faux democracy doesn't deserve support. We're seeing people beginning to be riled, now, who have been lying supine for a decade or more. People are getting angry. They're getting involved. If we switch from King Stork back to King Log at this point, slumber will take over, again. But if things continue to get worse--as they would, if nothing changes--then I could see things breaking open, much for the better.

So it isn't a matter of choosing the lesser of two evils, but of hoping the greater of the two gets people angry enough to do away with a system that promotes both, IMO.

[Moonbiter]

Dragon Wench wrote:

I selected the first option (I usually vote after considerable research). Fifteen, ten, or even five, years ago I might have said I don't vote because there is nobody really worth voting for and that doing so just supports an inherently flawed political structure.

However, the reality is that I'm a minority, and my refusal to vote changes absolutely nothing. *sigh*
So, I suppose I have adopted something of a "pragmatic" approach. Seeing as somebody is going to acquire power, regardless of my personal opinions on voting, I support the candidate that most closely represents my views. Or, sometimes, I even vote strategically.
Several federal elections back, for example, the Conservative candidate in my area was a far right Christian fundamentalist. Instead of voting for the New Democrat candidate (which would have been my first choice), I voted for the Liberal. Why? Because the Liberal had the best chance of defeating the Conservative, and it was a close race.

Also... given the struggle women went through to obtain the right to vote I'm not comfortable with forfeiting that right.

When I started voting, my party of choice was in power and riding high. Right now they're almost at the bottom of the political food chain, and they did it all themselves. However, I still vote for them because I believe in their ideas and the general principles that's behind them. Because of the stupendous incompetence of the party leadership, and the way that shifts between political blocks, there's not a tequila shot's chance at Spring Break for them to get back in power without a major workover, but they're still "my" party, and yes, I feel obliged to vote for them. I will vote as much as I can just to make my tiny squeak of a voice heard.

But then again, I don't live in America anymore, and though I disagree with Fable's way of seeing things, that's based on me living in/with a completely different political system. It's not up to me to say which one is the better, but my humble opinion is like The Wench points out here: You have to make your voice and opinion heard! I don't feel that it's a "duty," but it's just something I have to do, personally.

My 1 Euro...

[Magrus]

I'm with Fable on this one. Anyone who happens to believe that my voting for anyone is going to make a difference in how things work is deluded, or unable to grasp the situation in this country. Big business and money rule this country, not some voted in politician. Every politician voted in is expected to pull off favors for those who supported them financially in getting to that position.

Sooner or later, there's going to be a toppling of the US government. Whether it be another civil war, or the politicians decide to give up power when the people threaten one. It really is no longer an "if", but "when", mostly determined by when a large number of citizens here realize they are being lied to from the moment the step into schools here. Every time they turn on the TV, or the radio, or go to a ball game, or read the newspapers. Once that happens, and people comprehend what has been going on, and a new system is established, I might start taking an active part in my government. Until then, I lack the monetary funds necessary to affect this government. The only use voting has when trying to vote in a high level government official is to delude yourself into thinking this place is still a democracy.

[Lady Dragonfly]

Cicero said:

"I prefer the most unfair peace to the most righteous war."

I say:

I prefer a mediocre government to a good civil war.

To those who think that their votes don't make any difference:

Unfortunately, thousands of people stay home for this very reason. THOUSANDS votes could make a difference. People stayed home and Dubya and Co. won. Twice.

[fable]

Unfortunately, thousands of people stay home for this very reason. THOUSANDS votes could make a difference. People stayed home and Dubya and Co. won. Twice.

You're forgetting that Dubya didn't win the first time around, because he wasn't elected. The Supreme Court first okayed a recount in one state that would have potentially given the vote to his opponent, and then changed its mind, closing down the recount and literally declaring Bush the winner.

And you're also ignoring how the system works, here in the US. It isn't a plurality of votes that elect a president, but the electoral votes per state. I live in a state, for example, where if 100,000 more people voted for them, both Gore and Kerry would still have lost the election, since they'd already won New Jersey. What's more, Gore won the popular vote across the nation. But that didn't matter.

So my vote wouldn't have counted, in either case.