You can't complain if you *did* vote

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
i'd sooner eat maggots than participate in that foolishness...

That's.. disturbing. Thanks for that mental image...


Back to the OP, I have to disagree. Given the fact that I never have and never will run for office, voting is my only real opportunity to voice my opinion in a way that matters. I can post here all day long, but in the end it doesn't actually mean anything and it doesn't change anything. At least by voting I have a chance to help change things if I don't like what's happening. If you went to a restaurant and ordered your steak well-done and it showed up rare, would you sit back and say "Well I helped this restaurant stay in business, so I have no right to complain when they screw up" or would you send it back?

Originally posted by whatukno
Interesting, so your solution is for everyone to NOT vote, and basically let the PTB choose whoever they want in anyway.

Basically. Is that not what they do anyway? So why bother to vote? Let them just pick their puppet and expose this fraud for exactly what it is.

I got another solution.

Research your candidates, learn about your independent candidates and when you go to the polls vote for people that you feel actually will do good in charge.

I do and I have. However your single vote for some candidate who gets ignored by the MSM has a snowballs chance in hell of ever being elected. It just wont happen. They get excluded from debates, nothing in the newspapers, and ridiculed on TV newscast. Your average voter has no clue they are even out there. So I as an individual may do these things and be informed, but your fighting an uphill battle and you are clearly outnumbered by the masses who only think they have 2 choices. How long can you keep doing this to no avail before it is time to try something else? I have been doing for over 10 years now, nothing has changed. At some point you have to stop beating your head against the wall and realize that "hey this hurts and I'm almost brain dead now. Maybe I should stop"

I never vote a straight ticket. Voting a straight ticket is for brain dead zombies.

Agreed, but sadly we are outnumbered by these brain dead zombies.

There are usually more candidates than just the Democrats or Republicans, learn about them.

edit on 11/4/2010 by whatukno because: (no reason given)

Been there, done that, and even got the Ron Paul t-shirt lol. Again however, your fighting an uphill battle with the majority who is uninformed and votes strictly on which lies the choose to believe.

"I don't like the system, so I will not participate in it. This will make the system change for the better and I will be more apt to participate then."

This is repeated every election cycle by apathetic voters.

The system remains the same. Not taking action is not an action. It's getting you nowhere.

reply to post by links234


And just where are we going by continuing to participate in this fraud? Are you satisfied? Are you happy with the election process? Are you happy with the elected officials?

I love how everyone says that by refusing to participate you accomplish nothing, but nothing is being accomplished by participating. SO if both ways are wrong, what is right?

Originally posted by MrWendal
And just where are we going by continuing to participate in this fraud?

Where ever you want to go. The possibilities are yours and yours alone.

Are you satisfied?

I'm unsatisfied with spineless democrats. There are those that have a spine, I'm satisfied with them.

Are you happy with the election process?

The election process is my state is pretty great, the other 48 states that don't have this system need some work. I'm not a citizen in those states, I have little say.

Are you happy with the elected officials?

I'm happy with the ones that were able to pass the legislation that they did while they could. The ones that voted for the health care bill and lost, I'm damn proud of them.

I love how everyone says that by refusing to participate you accomplish nothing, but nothing is being accomplished by participating. SO if both ways are wrong, what is right?

Nothing is accomplished by participating only if a few people participate. Why is it a majority of the population feels they have no impact and are played by the system that the minority use?

There are problems with the system...but when a majority of people agree to not realize their capabilities to change the system and fail to act is when the problem persists and is amplified. Non-existent votes are NOT counted for non-existent candidates.

The foundations of democracy rest on those who participate, we live in a DEMOCRATIC republic, we elect our representatives DEMOCRATICALLY.

41.5% of the population voted, 58.5% (a majority of the people) decided that they don't have a say in a democracy. A majority decided that a minority held greater sway. A majority felt they weren't adequately represented...without stepping forward to represent themselves.

If you spent more time convincing that apathetic majority to participate and change the system instead of spouting off your inactions, you would change the system, guaranteed. Because that's how the system works. A majority rules in this country, right now (according to at least one account), the majority is at home masturbating.

reply to post by MrWendal

Basically. Is that not what they do anyway? So why bother to vote? Let them just pick their puppet and expose this fraud for exactly what it is.

There are no "powers that be" - unless you mean the voters and/or a deity. There are certainly political machinations - democrats and republicans funding the campaigns of 'easy prey' during the primaries, lobbyists, etc. However, no one person or group has enough influence, control, or power to turn the vote into a 'sham.'

There are certainly plenty of back-room deals and political power-plays made. The reason people in politics make these grabs at power? Because they don't have it to begin with.

There is an old story - I believe it was Greek in origin, though I could be mistaken. It's about a young court jester known as Damocles. Damocles served as an ego-boost to a particularly brutal king considered to be a tyrant. One day, our young brown-noser tells the king how great it is to be seated in the throne, and how amazing the king's life is. The king looks back, slightly amused, and asks Damocles if, tomorrow, he would like to take his place as king. No declaring war or any of that stuff, but he gets to live the life of the king, so long as he sits in the throne.

Damocles is exhilarated and cannot accept the offer fast enough. The next day, he's treated as royalty, and holds a banquet for all of his friends and family. As they come in and take a seat at the table, Damocles notices they are giving him rather shocked and horrified looks. Damocles looks up, and suspended by a horse's hair above him, is a sword. Damocles jumps up as the king appears from the corner of the room, reminding Damocles that the deal was he take the throne.

Obviously, Damocles protests on account of the life-threatening sword hung above his head. The king then tells Damocles that life as the king is like sitting in that throne. Those with power will always be under threat of those who seek it.

There may be a lot of power in the higher echelons of political parties and business groups - but if any of them had nearly as much power as the average ATS member seems to suggest - it would quickly collapse into infighting, or be swamped by subordinates. No power concentrated in such a magnitude can remain stable - thermodynamics applies to society as well.

I do and I have. However your single vote for some candidate who gets ignored by the MSM has a snowballs chance in hell of ever being elected. It just wont happen.

The house currently has three third party candidates. Further - is that third party candidate ignored by you? No? Then, would you not be playing into the hand of "the powers that be" if you believe the illusion that third party candidates have no power? Less than half of registered voters (not counting those who didn't take the time to register) turned up to the poles to vote. Now, not all of them do so because they don't think a third party can 'win' - but it's not a winner's game. You don't vote to win. It's not a competition - THAT is the illusion.

"The powers" have turned voting into a competition, and prey on the human desire to win. After a while of 'losing' - you get tired of showing up for the game.

They get excluded from debates, nothing in the newspapers, and ridiculed on TV newscast.

The third party candidates running for the senate seat here in MO got in some good debates - though none of those debates get a whole lot of mass media coverage anyway. Many other third party candidates for other local elections didn't even show up to the debates or media coverage to which they were invited. I'm not going to vote for someone who can't show up or, at the very least, leave a message that says "sorry, things came up - I at least have the presence of mind to try and appear halfway responsible."

Your average voter has no clue they are even out there.

Well, there you go. You've got a mission, now. Rather than whining on ATS about how it doesn't matter - how about writing your local papers and radio stations about more actively pursuing third party coverage? How about writing those local parties and volunteering a little of your time to help spread the word about a candidate?

So I as an individual may do these things and be informed, but your fighting an uphill battle and you are clearly outnumbered by the masses who only think they have 2 choices. How long can you keep doing this to no avail before it is time to try something else?

That's the cool thing about what is happening now. People aren't voting for candidates nearly like they were two and four years ago. People are voting for policy changes and expecting their elected officials to deliver. I doubt the republicans are going to deliver as much as people are wanting - and the democrats are certainly not going to,either. We'll see the rise of third parties in congressional seats.

I have been doing for over 10 years now, nothing has changed. At some point you have to stop beating your head against the wall and realize that "hey this hurts and I'm almost brain dead now. Maybe I should stop"

Stop voting to win. Vote for the representative of your choice and hold their feet to the fire, regardless of who 'wins' the office. Whether they are the person you voted for, or not, is irrelevant - they are your representative and have a duty to represent the people of their district. You don't cast a ballot and let whoever gets the office do whatever they want because "they won."

That's the illusion people need to see through. Whether it was a planned element of psychological manipulation or just a gradual progression of human competitive nature - you have to stop believing it is a competition, that the "winner" has somehow inherited the right to do what they want while in office.

Yeah - you may have voted for the other guy, but they are still bound to the duty of a public servant, and you're the public.

I love how everyone says that by refusing to participate you accomplish nothing, but nothing is being accomplished by participating. SO if both ways are wrong, what is right?

Voting accomplishes exactly what it was supposed to - select an individual to take the office of the representative of the people for that level and function of government. That is -all- voting is intended to do. It is not to choose policies. Just because the democrats win does not mean people voted for socialism. Nor does it mean those who voted republican (or third party) no longer have a voice. Any representative who ignores a segment of his/her district based on political affiliation should be drawn and quartered with a special election to follow.

What is right is to vote, and hold your representatives accountable. Talk to people about it. Sure - you are just one person. However, there is a mathematical constant called the "six degrees of separation." There are, at most, six people between you and I. One of my friends has a friend who has a friend in your area, who has another friend who knows one of your friends. This is true irrespective of physical distance - and is almost creepy.

What you say, what you do - it gets around, and can get around much faster than you realize. Where do you think half of our language comes from? Someone made up a word at some point and time, and before everyone knew it - the whole nation was saying it and it was getting added to dictionaries in Japan.

You don't do it to win. You do it because it's right - because it is what you should do.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


HAHA I was talking about this exact subject with a friend of mine 2 days ago and I mentioned Carlin! There's no denying Carlin's reasoning! lol

I don't vote because, with voting machines (something the programming of which should be simple and straightforward) that have "proprietary" software, I KNOW my vote is moot.

Why waste my time?