To be, or not to be, Politically active

I'm just curious as to how member's here feel about being politically active and voting.

For one I have had a conversation with people who believe on both sides of the issue.

For the yes vote and to be politically active, the reasons I received ranged from, people died for this right to vote, and to change anything start's with you at the ground all the way to the top. So if you are protesting out by not voting you are not upholding the civic duty of being a United state's citizen.

For the no voting and not being politically active, the reasons I received ranged from, the lack of people whom you can vote for at one time makes it seem like who is the lesser of two evil's. And the reasoning that the entire thing is rigged because it's not the popular vote that truly matters it's the electoral college.

I personally do not vote, perhaps I should but I lean toward feeling like my vote doesn't matter in the slightest. I also believe that the president most likely doesn't even have a true say in what happens and is more of a face than a position of power.

So out of curiosity how do you feel about this?

If this is in the wrong place my apologies, however this is a chit chat thought so.....

I have never voted in the past as I have always felt that with the dominant 2 parties in the Uk there is little point.

To me democratic voting is like having the right to choose between a poke in the eye or a kick in the nuts.

I may decide to vote in the next election but it will be a stratigic vote to work against Ukip gaining a seat.

a reply to: iclimbtowers

If America had a voting system like Australia, I'd probably vote. As it stands my vote is meaningless unless there is a tie for some reason which almost never happens. Coupled with the meaningless vote is the lack of choices, which only acts to amplify the desperation of the situation.

I don't like political parties and I don't like the fact that our candidates need to raise millions of dollars to run a successful campaign, meaning that poor and unpopular people have zero chance of ever getting elected (hint, hint, sometimes people who are right are incredibly unpopular).

Political parties are breeding grounds for corruption and act more as a mechanism to internally regulate the activities of individual to ensure that no one steps out of line. If you have an otherwise democratic society with strong centralized political parties, you are going to have tyranny and corruption nearly every time. It is hard enough to find a single virtuous person willing to stand up for what is right, let alone finding a group of them to police one another successfully.

We would be better off under a benevolent tyrant than we are under our current system, and that is just sad, when a classical liberal such as myself gets teary eyed at the thought of King Arthur. That is symptom #1 that things have gone off the deep end and need a steep and radical correction.

a reply to: Nechash

Political parties are breeding grounds for corruption and act more as a mechanism to internally regulate the activities of individual to ensure that no one steps out of line.

Agreed. Busy bodies minding everyone else's business.

I vote for real change.

Yes, I agree the system is very flawed, and if I was to vote, even if I completely agreed with one person, If they had an ad campaign that took jab's at another running person, I wouldn't vote for them, because I could care less about what those people have done, I want to know what the person I agree with is doing and plan's to do.

But maybe it's just me, they seem to focus on everyone else more than themselves, it's almost become a reality show these "elections".

I wonder what Shakespeare would have said...

Neither a republican nor a democrat be...

Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some
by it after a successful run for public office...

Hell is empty and all the devils are politicians...

(For the people who accidently voted for the
wrong candidate)...What's done, can't be undone...

Love all, trust a few, and neither do for politicians...

Cowards die many times, but politicians seem to have immunity...

Friends, Romans, countrymen...lend me a charitable campaign donation...

I think all of us non-voters should get together and strip the power from all the foolish current voters. We should vote in an anarchist so that these ridiculous laws start getting removed. It would take a long time for an anarchist to make many changes but I believe after a few presidencies we will have things where we want them and vote in some inanimate objects so things stay where they are. Hard to bribe president lamp IMO

but then again we all are well aware that only corporations have real voting power.

a reply to: rival

Are you suggesting that there is a way to relay unpopular ideas that might actually be applauded instead of downvoted into oblivion?

a reply to: theyknowwhoyouare

An anarchist president could end everything. They could unilaterally issue executive orders to the military and most bureaucracies. They could command the treasury to withhold payments and they could veto almost everything. An anarchist president would probably be assassinated within his first hour of office.

By fundamental reasoning for ALWAYS voting (in the US) is:

1) by not voting you abdicate your responsiblity as a citizen.
2) you have no right to complain whatsoever about anything if you don't vote.
3) and, perhaps most important, you act (by voting) against the desires of TPTB who want a non-voting public.

It's voting in every election, city, county, state and federal that counts. It is local officials and referenda and propositions that count and in those cases you vote does count.

And, just to stay true an repug bash:

Being in Australia we get fined for not voting in federal elections. Generally I prefer the concept of the informed vote but for something so big I am ok with it. Still having paper ballots does help the integrity of the vote and is something I am happy about.

More recently I decided to run in the next council election, mostly it is a learning experience and will not be disappointed if I don't get in. Just attending the local council meetings, seeing how it runs, meeting community interested people and learning about what issues are going on is helping me understand better how to work with the system rather than against it. Government does move slow, but it has a lot of torque.

originally posted by: Nechash
a reply to: theyknowwhoyouare

An anarchist president could end everything. They could unilaterally issue executive orders to the military and most bureaucracies. They could command the treasury to withhold payments and they could veto almost everything. An anarchist president would probably be assassinated within his first hour of office.

But then wouldn't be an "anarchist'" were they to issue 'unilateral' directives. LOL

a reply to: FyreByrd

Anarchist in ideology, dictator in practice. ;p