What would it take ....
- Thread starter shesulsa
- Start date
HKphooey
Senior Master
Unfortunately, a gun to their head.
Seriously though, I think people will have to see the level of politicians brought to a new level. I think too many people feel no matter who they vote for, things will not change. Me personally, I have learned to accept the lesser of the two evils and vote for that individual.
Seriously though, I think people will have to see the level of politicians brought to a new level. I think too many people feel no matter who they vote for, things will not change. Me personally, I have learned to accept the lesser of the two evils and vote for that individual.
celtic_crippler
Senior Master
There's no simple answer to your question.
But one reason could be that people don't care. As long as they can sit in thier air conditioned homes, kicked back in their recliners, with all the movie channels on cable, and an X-Box to play with....they don't care. Even skyrocketing gas prices haven't moved many to vote. Unless there's something drastic that affects them on a "personal" level, they just don't care.
But one reason could be that people don't care. As long as they can sit in thier air conditioned homes, kicked back in their recliners, with all the movie channels on cable, and an X-Box to play with....they don't care. Even skyrocketing gas prices haven't moved many to vote. Unless there's something drastic that affects them on a "personal" level, they just don't care.
Gee, have the ability to vote by phone toll free and text voting.. works for American Idol .. more votes than any American President.. now that's rather messed up ..
American's lead busy lives, getting to the polls may interfere with life.. so make it easier for starters.. Unfortunately we are an electronic populous.
And yes, I'm registered
American's lead busy lives, getting to the polls may interfere with life.. so make it easier for starters.. Unfortunately we are an electronic populous.
And yes, I'm registered
To get me to vote AGAIN?
1) People worth voting for.
2) People to stop telling me that I am throwing my votes to <insert opposite partys candidate here> by not voting for the "Big 2"
3) Less corruption in the Voting system,
and Lastly
4) The removal of the Electoral College.
1) People worth voting for.
2) People to stop telling me that I am throwing my votes to <insert opposite partys candidate here> by not voting for the "Big 2"
3) Less corruption in the Voting system,
and Lastly
4) The removal of the Electoral College.
I live in a one party state. 100% of my senators and representatives and 87% of my state-level reps are from one party.
My fearless prediction: this November, the blue team will win.
I don't bloody care whether it is the unbalanced to the red party or unbalanced to the blue party. Unbalanced is unbalanced, and I frankly don't like either one.
Oh yes and...jury stalkers. I mean, Jury Duty.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts says they don't pull voter reg roles for potential jurors...Bullshido. It's their best database of CITIZENS. They technically pull of the town census stats....but then, um, conveniently cross-check the stats with the voter registration roles.
Every single move I've made...the instant my name cross-checks I get called to Essex Superior Court.
What has kept me voting has been our governors race. It's been the only whiff of second party that this state has seen in the last 15 years. But, now that the race is turning out to be not Dem vs. Rep but Dem vs. Ind. vs. Rep...I'm just not feeling it.
Wake me when it's over, and don't tell the Superior Essex where I live, mmmkay?
My fearless prediction: this November, the blue team will win.
I don't bloody care whether it is the unbalanced to the red party or unbalanced to the blue party. Unbalanced is unbalanced, and I frankly don't like either one.
Oh yes and...jury stalkers. I mean, Jury Duty.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts says they don't pull voter reg roles for potential jurors...Bullshido. It's their best database of CITIZENS. They technically pull of the town census stats....but then, um, conveniently cross-check the stats with the voter registration roles.
Every single move I've made...the instant my name cross-checks I get called to Essex Superior Court.
What has kept me voting has been our governors race. It's been the only whiff of second party that this state has seen in the last 15 years. But, now that the race is turning out to be not Dem vs. Rep but Dem vs. Ind. vs. Rep...I'm just not feeling it.
Wake me when it's over, and don't tell the Superior Essex where I live, mmmkay?
Politicians seem to be, by there nature corrupt. Once that stops, I imagine more people will vote. But many seem to see it as picking the lesser of evils....
shesulsa said:
Why?
I can understand why Republicans want to register voters that are in line with Republican ideals and Democrats registering voters in line with their ideals, but why the general argument for a greater quantity of voters, generally without qualification of how interested or informed those voters are?
I think you are probably one who is genuinely interested in politics and you put an effort into being informed about what is going on. Does it concern you that those that don't care nearly as much may out rock your vote?
Just curious about what people think of quality v. quantity of voters and if quantity is really important.
Because I take a look at what "quality" has delivered and I can only hope that "quantity" would be better...
heretic888
Senior Master
Henderson said:
Now, y'see, I'm somewhat torn on this issue....
On the one hand, I know why the Electoral College was set up in the first place. It was esablished to act as a "buffer" between the power imbalance between the large and small states. In fact, the founding American government had quite a bit of debate and argumentation about this very issue.
For example, if we were today to remove the Electoral College, then Florida, Texas, and California would be even more powerful (politically speaking) than they are now. And smaller states such as Maine and Rhode Island would become even more of a tiny blip on the radar than they are right now.
The larger states wanted straight-up population votes. The smaller states wanted equal representation from all the states. Our founding government opted for a compromise with the Electoral College, and I think it is a perfectly reasonable compromise.
At the same time, as others have often pointed out, there is always the danger that the College can simply thumb their noses at the populace and vote however the hell they damn well choose. As such, the College could be argued to be an elitist oligarchy that circumvents the "will of the people". I also believe that to be a perfectly reasonable concern on the part of many voters.
But, what to do? What to do?
Voting? My husband has no interest with voting. If he goes to vote, it will only be because I asked him. He will just say, "who do I vote?" He doesn't care and will not bother to read up on issues. If I give him a list, he will vote what I pick. Essentially, I am voting "twice". If I don't give him a list, he will just arbitrarily select whatever is there, regardless of the person, issues, or proposition. He would just rather not go.
What will motivate him to vote of his own accord and to take interest in national issues? I've tried.... If any of you have the answer, let me know.
- Ceicei
What will motivate him to vote of his own accord and to take interest in national issues? I've tried.... If any of you have the answer, let me know.
- Ceicei
Similar threads
