You just can't write this stuff!! Number of Hamilton stars haven't voted in YEARS

You just can't write this stuff!!
After everyone on stage were holding hands and announcing, respectfully of course, that they had fear about the new admin upholding their inalienable right. Turns out that voting isn't high on the list of some of the Hamilton cast.

Some of Broadway smash Hamilton's stars haven't cast votes in years
Voting records are not out for the 2016 presidential election
However, many of the leads have skipped out on voting in past elections
At least four cast members have missed elections in the last ten years
Despite this, the cast read a statement to vice president-elect Mike Pence
The statement, written by Lin-Manuel Miranda, said they were worried about Pence's new administration with president-elect Donald Trump

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... tml#ixzz4QkgGobbs

a reply to: seasonal

Voting is not a pre-requisite for the right to express one's self freely.

The rights under the constitution are granted to all.

That said, they could participate in the civic process if they want to make a change.

a reply to: seasonal
Whether someone has voted or not is allowed to be public knowledge? Good grief. I would have expected that to be as private as the voting decision itself.

a reply to: seasonal

Gee.

So upset.

Maybe if they children had voted..... they wouldn't have to be so upset.

Pathetic.

a reply to: zosimov

Nope, not a prerequisite for expressing one's self.

However, it is with regards to having your childish whining given any merit, or respect.


Tough luck. No need to spit out your dummy.

a reply to: seasonal

That is the left in a nutshell! the MOST NOISE and the LEAST AFFIRMATIVE action! Yet expect their envisioned result.

It's a dangerous slippery slope when one starts limiting freedom of speech.

I thought the "right" was in support of our Constitution?

a reply to: zosimov

Its not a case of saying "you CANT say that as you didnt vote!"

Its the case of saying "you may have a strong opinion but your lack of action makes that opinion futile"

originally posted by: zosimov
a reply to: seasonal

Voting is not a pre-requisite for the right to express one's self freely.

No but it does make them look like asses.

originally posted by: AMNicks
a reply to: zosimov

Its not a case of saying "you CANT say that as you didnt vote!"

Its the case of saying "you may have a strong opinion but your lack of action makes that opinion futile"

But speaking out is another form of action. Inaction is doing nothing.

a reply to: zosimov



Right, if you don't vote, don't b!tch.

Voting is not a pre-requisite for the right to express one's self freely.

The rights under the constitution are granted to all.

That said, they could participate in the civic process if they want to make a change.

a reply to: seasonal

I disagree 100%. Which is my right protected under the Constitution.

a reply to: DISRAELI

I think you can find out if someone voted, not who they voted for.

Whether someone has voted or not is allowed to be public knowledge? Good grief. I would have expected that to be as private as the voting decision itself.

a reply to: zosimov

Sure, that's like my God my house is on fire with a fire hose laying there, ready to go.

You don't pick up the hose and b!tch at the guys who did.

But speaking out is another form of action. Inaction is doing nothing.

True i agree, but lets say you seen someone getting murdered.. i could shout "hey stop that!" and then walk away and carry on with my life?

Or i could shout "hey stop that!" whilst phoning the police and physically stopping the murder?

Reaction and pro-action are completely different and thus result in different outcomes.

a reply to: AMNicks

Well I've voted for the lesser of two evils for the past 5 elections (minus this one in which I voted for the ineffective 3rd party). At some point perhaps people might get tired of it and try to make a change through different avenues.

I wouldn't fault them for that.

a reply to: zosimov

I would say go vote, write in if you don't like the candidates.

Of course you can complain, but your the one who didn't vote, soooo. What are you complaining about?

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: zosimov

I would say go vote, write in if you don't like the candidates.

Of course you can complain, but your the one who didn't vote, soooo. What are you complaining about?

Sorry, are you talking to me? I did vote as I just explained. But still support people's rights to speak whether they voted or not.

a reply to: seasonal

If someone believes voting does not make a difference, then it makes sense to not vote.

Realist: Its its cold outside, I hate cold weather and I hate the cold.
Voter: Well you didn't vote for hot weather, so you can't complain.
Realist: I think I just did.

Some of us don't believe in voting as a solution, seeing how the chance of changing the outcome of a national election is less than winning the lottery. Voting is a way of expressing a personal opinion of who the best candidate is, and that's it. Furthermore voting for someone only because they have a chance to win is exactly polar opposite to common sense, which would tell me that the further away someone is from winning, the MORE they need my vote. If they don't have a chance to win, then vote for them thereby giving them a chance to win. The less votes someone gets, the more valuable each vote was in terms of a percentage of their support. So the first support for a candidate is the most valuable, while each additional supporter is less valuable, especially after they are already in first place. Furthermore each vote over first place is totally and entirely worthless as the candidate only requires the most votes, making those votes a waste of time if one's goal is to change the election outcome. If someone's goal is to express their opinion, then the vote was not a waste of time but in that case they cannot concern them self with making it a nasty popularity contest where they only vote for someone popular.

If you tell someone they are only supposed to vote for people who have a chance of winning then you are changing the vote into a trivial popularity contest where people don't vote for the best candidates and instead vote for the lesser a-hole of the popular ones (lets face it popular people are often a-holes ie Trump, Clinton, most celebrities). Growing up I've personally never been a big fan of popular people, and specifically like unpopular and crazy people (Ron Paul, Socrates). The popular people at my school are loud and obnoxious... it actually threw me into depression for a few years because I didn't like anyone at school. So by definition I'm not allowed to be represented in Republic style government. Socrates was so unpopular they actually offed him and he was so crazy he happily guzzled down the poison they gave him to drink, wow. But I wanted him as philosopher king, oh well.

Given people's flawed voting strategies, it would be a waste of time to participate in voting, unless a friend or candidate explicitly requests a vote.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: zosimov



Right, if you don't vote, don't b!tch.

Voting is not a pre-requisite for the right to express one's self freely.

The rights under the constitution are granted to all.

That said, they could participate in the civic process if they want to make a change.

BS every American has the right to voice their opinion whether they voted or not. Don't vote don't complain ok then how about having only the people who voted pay for their new government and let those of us who didn't vote live tax free.