The Right to Vote

[i_am_the_swammi]

OK, I understand that the right to vote is something our forefathers fought to protect, and as a citizen, it is our responsibility to help select the leaders of our country.

 

That being said, it seems people look at others with disdain and mockery if someone says they didnt vote. "What, you didn't vote? Its your obligation...people died to give you the right to vote."

 

Well, ya know what? I have lots of rights I don't exercise. People fought and died so I could have the right to bear arms, yet I don't...and am not chastized for it.

 

Enlighten me.....why is "the right to vote" looked at as one of the biggies, and more important to exercise than any other right?

[SEC=UGA]

OK, I understand that the right to vote is something our forefathers fought to protect, and as a citizen, it is our responsibility to help select the leaders of our country.

 

That being said, it seems people look at others with disdain and mockery if someone says they didnt vote. "What, you didn't vote? Its your obligation...people died to give you the right to vote."

 

Well, ya know what? I have lots of rights I don't exercise. People fought and died so I could have the right to bear arms, yet I don't...and am not chastized for it.

 

Enlighten me.....why is "the right to vote" looked at as one of the biggies, and more important to exercise than any other right?

 

To me it is one of the biggies and thus should be limited.

[cre8tiff]

OK, I understand that the right to vote is something our forefathers fought to protect, and as a citizen, it is our responsibility to help select the leaders of our country.

 

That being said, it seems people look at others with disdain and mockery if someone says they didnt vote. "What, you didn't vote? Its your obligation...people died to give you the right to vote."

 

Well, ya know what? I have lots of rights I don't exercise. People fought and died so I could have the right to bear arms, yet I don't...and am not chastized for it.

 

Enlighten me.....why is "the right to vote" looked at as one of the biggies, and more important to exercise than any other right?

The Revolution was fought in large part due to lack of representation for the colonists. If you don't vote,. you don't honor that. I would say the right to vote is the single most important right we have, not just one of the "biggies". We have had one of the longest peaceful transitions of power of any nation out there. Because of that right.

 

Now if you want to talk about abolishing the Electoral College, I'm with ya.

 

I am also of the opinion if you don't vote, then you lose the right to beyoch about the government.

[Kid Cid]

The right to vote and have a say in your government and the way things are run in this country is more than just a right, it is an obligation IMO. Our system of government is a representative democracy which means that as a governmental structure, it is a republic, not a true democracy. Hell, just look at all the bickering that goes on in the halls of Congress, can you imagine if every person in the U.S. had equal say in the way things are run? Heh, if you think we have gridlock now, nothing would ever get done then.

 

OK, the point is that as a representative democracy, we elect representatives to speak for us in the halls of government. In order for you as an individual to have a voice in government, you want to elect a representative that will present a case most closely related to your views on a particular topic. Abstention, or choosing not to vote is a viable act on any individual's part. However, if that individual withholds their vote not because of a conscious choice on their part, but because they are too lazy or simply do not feel inclined to go to the polling place and register their vote, then that individual has also tacitly removed their right to complain about the direction the government is taking. To me, this is the law of unintended consequences once again rearing its head.

 

In addition, it also tells me that this individual is not really concerned for the welfare of his or her fellow human beings, that they are selfish in their outlook towards others. After all, if a person can't be bothered to take the time to vote on important issues affecting the lives of everyone in their community, they obviously don't care about anyone but themselves. They're getting along just fine, now aren't they?

 

The bottom line is not that someone has fought and died for us to retain this right. They have and I salute those that have given up their lives for us to maintain this right. No, the bottom line is that it is part of the responsibility handed to you as an adult citizen of the United States of America. It is every bit as much part of your responsibility as providing food and shelter for your family. We easily look down upon members of our community who have ignored their responsibility towards others yet many choose not to view the responsibility to vote in the same light.

[Perchoutofwater]

I don't think people particularly uninformed people should be criticized for not voting. I do think they should be criticized for not voting if they then turn around and start complaining about our elected officials. Honestly if we are going to put restrictions on our 2nd Amendment, I'd like to see us put restrictions on voting such as you have to be a net tax payer in order to vote.

[redrumjuice]

If you aren't smart enough to get a drivers license, you should not be allowed to vote.

 

If you are on gov't titty, (housing, food stamps, unemployment, etc) you should not be allowed to vote.

[untateve]

If you aren't smart enough to get a drivers license, you should not be allowed to vote.

 

If you are on gov't titty, (housing, food stamps, unemployment, etc) you should not be allowed to vote.

 

you're shtick is dumb.

[i_am_the_swammi]

I am also of the opinion if you don't vote, then you lose the right to beyoch about the government.

 

I can see this point to a degree...but what if you find that all candidates running for office are not worthy of that office? Should you still vote for the lesser of two evils? If Dick A and Dick B are running against each other, I can't criticize either Dick since I didn't vote? If I am not voting, I am basically stating that I think both candidates are garbage.

 

Wouldn't a mass of people not voting, and thus letting our public servants know that they are unhappy with the current candidates, be a bigger statement? Wouldn't that maybe prompt better candidates in the future if they can say to themselves "hey, no one voted last election. If I run and can orchestrate a solid campaign, I have a great shot at winning." It might very well bring out better options.

 

BTW, I don't disagree that voting isn't a terrific right we have been afforded. I just find it odd that its almost the only right that people judge other people on.

[Pope Flick]

BTW, I don't disagree that voting isn't a terrific right we have been afforded. I just find it odd that its almost the only right that people judge other people on.

 

 

I think this is due to the human subtext of billions of people not having that right at all, and to have something so simple available to you and not use it is really poor form given the state of the world today.

[bpwallace49]

you have to be a net tax payer in order to vote.

 

Along with this being so ridiculous it isnt funny, it would also disqualify many of our very wealthy politicans from running for office.

 

Or could they run for office, but not vote for themselves?

 

Perch, why dont we just go back to saying only white landowners can vote? The way it was intended? The tax code needs to be reformed, but disenfranchising Americans by saying they cant vote if they are not a net taxpayer is one of the most ignorant things I have ever heard.

[untateve]

I don't think people particularly uninformed people should be criticized for not voting. I do think they should be criticized for not voting if they then turn around and start complaining about our elected officials. Honestly if we are going to put restrictions on our 2nd Amendment, I'd like to see us put restrictions on voting such as you have to be a net tax payer in order to vote.

 

I agree. Poor people, people with various legitimate disabilities who are unable to work, and many college students shouldn't be allowed to vote. Why should any of these people have any voice in government?

[Delicious_bass]

The Revolution was fought in large part due to lack of representation for the colonists. If you don't vote,. you don't honor that. I would say the right to vote is the single most important right we have, not just one of the "biggies". We have had one of the longest peaceful transitions of power of any nation out there. Because of that right.

 

Now if you want to talk about abolishing the Electoral College, I'm with ya.

 

I am also of the opinion if you don't vote, then you lose the right to beyoch about the government.

What if none of the candidates are worth voting for?

 

The right to vote and have a say in your government and the way things are run in this country is more than just a right, it is an obligation IMO. Our system of government is a representative democracy which means that as a governmental structure, it is a republic, not a true democracy. Hell, just look at all the bickering that goes on in the halls of Congress, can you imagine if every person in the U.S. had equal say in the way things are run? Heh, if you think we have gridlock now, nothing would ever get done then.

 

OK, the point is that as a representative democracy, we elect representatives to speak for us in the halls of government. In order for you as an individual to have a voice in government, you want to elect a representative that will present a case most closely related to your views on a particular topic. Abstention, or choosing not to vote is a viable act on any individual's part. However, if that individual withholds their vote not because of a conscious choice on their part, but because they are too lazy or simply do not feel inclined to go to the polling place and register their vote, then that individual has also tacitly removed their right to complain about the direction the government is taking. To me, this is the law of unintended consequences once again rearing its head.

 

In addition, it also tells me that this individual is not really concerned for the welfare of his or her fellow human beings, that they are selfish in their outlook towards others. After all, if a person can't be bothered to take the time to vote on important issues affecting the lives of everyone in their community, they obviously don't care about anyone but themselves. They're getting along just fine, now aren't they?

 

The bottom line is not that someone has fought and died for us to retain this right. They have and I salute those that have given up their lives for us to maintain this right. No, the bottom line is that it is part of the responsibility handed to you as an adult citizen of the United States of America. It is every bit as much part of your responsibility as providing food and shelter for your family. We easily look down upon members of our community who have ignored their responsibility towards others yet many choose not to view the responsibility to vote in the same light.

I'll ask the same question here...what if none of the candidates are worth voting for? What if those that are elected are not working on behalf of the people they are supposed to serve but rather to line their own pockets?

 

How many people vote religiously based purely on party? How many people vote for whom they consider the "lesser of the evils"? Is not voting at all really worse than casting a vote (for someone you dont like/agree with) purely because you feel obligated to vote for someone?

 

Not looking to start a fight or attack anyone's opinion. Just asking some questions to see how people feel/think...

 

ETA: Swami kinda beat me to it

Edited November 3, 2010 by Delicious_bass

[i_am_the_swammi]

I'll ask the same question here...what if none of the candidates are worth voting for? What if those that are elected are not working on behalf of the people they are supposed to serve but rather to line their own pockets?

 

How many people vote religiously based purely on party? How many people vote for whom they consider the "lesser of the evils"? Is not voting at all really worse than casting a vote (for someone you dont like/agree with) purely because you feel obligated to vote for someone?

 

Not looking to start a fight or attack anyone's opinion. Just asking some questions to see how people feel/think...

Pretty much what I was thinking:

 

I can see this point to a degree...but what if you find that all candidates running for office are not worthy of that office? Should you still vote for the lesser of two evils? If Dick A and Dick B are running against each other, I can't criticize either Dick since I didn't vote? If I am not voting, I am basically stating that I think both candidates are garbage.

 

Let's take it to the most rudamentary level: supposed a rapist and a murderer were running for an office as the only two candidates (I know, I know). Should I feel compelled to vote for one of them because it is my constitutional right?

Edited November 3, 2010 by i_am_the_swammi

[rajncajn]

Maybe a better question is what is the point in voting when none of the candidates follow through with what is promised no matter who we elect? They say what they think the public wants to hear in order to get elected and then head on with their own personal agenda. They are lying, cheating backstabbers who are sucking this country dry and none of them seem to give a rats ass about "the people" once they get in office.

[Perchoutofwater]

Along with this being so ridiculous it isnt funny, it would also disqualify many of our very wealthy politicans from running for office.

 

Or could they run for office, but not vote for themselves?

 

Perch, why dont we just go back to saying only white landowners can vote? The way it was intended? The tax code needs to be reformed, but disenfranchising Americans by saying they cant vote if they are not a net taxpayer is one of the most ignorant things I have ever heard.

 

I wonder if Franklin thought it was ridiculous when he stated "When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."

[Azazello1313]

The right to vote and have a say in your government and the way things are run in this country is more than just a right, it is an obligation IMO.

 

I'm more concerned with the obligation to be informed and exercise the franchise seriously and responsibly. I am less troubled by the fact that whatever percentage of eligible people don't vote than I am by the fact that an exponentially greater percentage of people (some who vote, some who don't) don't know dick about american civics and history. do I wish more clueless people exercised their right to vote? no, I can't really say that I do.

[Yukon Cornelius]

I'm more concerned with the obligation to be informed and exercise the franchise seriously and responsibly. I am less troubled by the fact that whatever percentage of eligible people don't vote than I am by the fact that an exponentially greater percentage of people (some who vote, some who don't) don't know dick about american civics and history. do I wish more clueless people exercised their right to vote? no, I can't really say that I do.

agreed

 

"I wonder if Franklin thought it was ridiculous when he stated "When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."

Edited November 3, 2010 by Yukon Cornelius

[untateve]

I wonder if Franklin thought it was ridiculous when he stated "When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."

 

Are you implying that people who pay taxes cannot vote themselves money?

[bpwallace49]

Pretty much what I was thinking:

 

 

 

Let's take it to the most rudamentary level: supposed a rapist and a murderer were running for an office as the only two candidates (I know, I know). Should I feel compelled to vote for one of them because it is my constitutional right?

 

No third party candidates on your ballots?

[bpwallace49]

Are you implying that people who pay taxes cannot vote themselves money?

 

He is implying it is OK for them to do so.

 

perch, maybe we need to re-instate the different values during slavery. What was it . . . 4/7th of a slave (or non-net tax payer in your case) vote should count?

 

perch should the census only count net taxpayers, or human beings?

[Perchoutofwater]

Are you implying that people who pay taxes cannot vote themselves money?

 

No, but I am implying if you aren't a net tax payer and there is little likelihood that your taxes are going to increase you are much more likely to vote for politicians that are proposing to spend other people's money. I think we limited voting to net tax payers we would have a much smaller government, and would be in much better shape than we are today.

[SEC=UGA]

Pretty much what I was thinking:

 

 

 

Let's take it to the most rudamentary level: supposed a rapist and a murderer were running for an office as the only two candidates (I know, I know). Should I feel compelled to vote for one of them because it is my constitutional right?

 

We're not talking about the Republican primaries, here...

[SEC=UGA]

He is implying it is OK for them to do so.

 

perch, maybe we need to re-instate the different values during slavery. What was it . . . 4/7th of a slave (or non-net tax payer in your case) vote should count?

 

perch should the census only count net taxpayers, or human beings?

 

9/15ths

[Delicious_bass]

 

I'm more concerned with the obligation to be informed and exercise the franchise seriously and responsibly. I am less troubled by the fact that whatever percentage of eligible people don't vote than I am by the fact that an exponentially greater percentage of people (some who vote, some who don't) don't know dick about american civics and history. do I wish more clueless people exercised their right to vote? no, I can't really say that I do.

I think that is exactly what is happening, though, in many cases when people are made to feel they "have" to go vote even though they know very little about the candidates/issues/etc.

[Deathpig]

No third party candidates on your ballots?

The only other guy is Tarquin Fin-tim-lin-bin-whin-bim-lim-bus-stop-F'tang-F'tang-Olé-Biscuitbarrel, but most people would rather a rapist or a murderer than someone from the Silly Party (unless you're from Luton).