-->
@ludofl3x
Maybe I misread your mandatory voting post?
Yes you did.
USA - A Backsliding Democracy
Posts
Total:
129
-->
@ludofl3x
Let me rephrase since you seem myopic in your reading due to bias.
How do you ENSURE everyone in the country believes the system works? How do you deal with the people that choose to not vote and refuse Democracy?
If you don't answer that seriously, there is no consensus to Democracy.
Double R stated this"
"people must believe it to be legitimate"
So how do you do that? How do you ENSURE everyone does not refuse to vote due to distrust in the system?
If you're not in favor of making voting as accessible as possible...
Making voting accessible isn't the reason people distrust the system. It's not the reason they choose to not vote.
I would like to hear your detailed arguments to the contrary if you want to have a serious discussion.
As it stands now, in most places in America, it takes more effort to shop for groceries than it does to vote.
How do you ENSURE all people believe their vote matters as much as the food they buy?
-->
@Greyparrot
@ludofl3x
Even a mandatory vote, doesn't mean they believe in the system,
Be easy for them to just vote randomly, without care.
I've known people who aren't
conspiracy nuts, just don't feel their drop of a vote matters, in the ocean of votes,
So they declined to vote.
-->
@Lemming
Even a mandatory vote, doesn't mean they believe in the system
Exactly. So while it could be a component, it isn't sufficient.
Ensuring 100% accessibility to voting at the end point of a government mandated rifle won't solve that problem.
-->
@Greyparrot
Making voting accessible isn't the reason people distrust the system. It's not the reason they choose to not vote.
And you believe that people choose not to vote because of lobbyists? That, in your view, is the main issue? Not just for you, I know that's your position, but you imagine that's the widespread lack of faith in democracy?
-->
@ludofl3x
Have you really not done any research at all regarding the 100 million Americans that choose to not vote?
What are your uninformed opinions on the matter if so?
I'd really like to hear your detailed arguments as to how accessibility is the major concern for those 100 millions Americans as well since you seem to be fixated on that point.
-->
@Greyparrot
Have you really not done any research at all regarding the 100 million Americans that choose to not vote?What are your uninformed opinions on the matter if so?I'd really like to hear your detailed arguments as to how accessibility is the major concern for those 100 millions Americans as well since you seem to be fixated on that point.
No, I've done literally no research on 100M Americans "choosing" not to vote. I have a job, I don't have time for research to satisfy whatever level of expertise you think I should have in order to comment on it. I can tell you as someone who didn't vote until two years ago (after 20+ years of being eligible to do so), the biggest reason I never did had nothing to do with lobbyists, it had to do with the electoral college. THe population of my state always votes the way I would, so if we're not on a straight popular vote system, why would I go stand in line to vote? And I'm not alone, plenty of cynical people I know didn't vote until the 2020 election for the same reason. No one ever said "lobbyists". More people were like "I can do it by mail, why wouldn't I."
Accessibility is the best excuse not to vote. "I can't get to the polls easily." "I have to work and can't afford time off to go do it." "It's a hassle, it takes hours." Is there some research you've done that shows "lobbyists" are a common answer among people who don't vote? I put 'choose' in quotation marks because it's not always a choice. If you don't have a car, and you live in a rural area, for example. If you take ANY measure to make it easier for all eligible voters to vote, for those who can register to do so, then you reduce the reasons not to vote.
-->
@ludofl3x
I don't have time for research to satisfy whatever level of expertise you think I should have in order to comment on it.
If I thought you did, I wouldn't have asked for your uninformed opinion. There's no need to get catty over this issue as we are in more agreement than not.
Accessibility is the best excuse not to vote.
"Excuse" is the perfect term here. I like it.
So you agree "accessibility" is a red-herring to excuse and obfuscate the actual reasons why people don't think their vote matters?
the biggest reason I never did had nothing to do with lobbyists, it had to do with the electoral college.
What about state elections? Out of the big 3 in DC, the Speaker of the house, the Majority Senate leader, and the President, who has the most power and responsibility for crafting Federal legislation in your opinion?
-->
@Greyparrot
The reason I registered to vote was because there was a referendum on the ballot that I cared very deeply about, and I wanted to vote on. State elections I always used the "what a pain in the neck" excuse. As it happens we had an election this year for which they mailed out ballots, and I voted using that method.
Don't lose the thread: is there some research somewhere that show a plurality of eligible voters choose not to vote because lobbyists? You're not going to address how 100M AMericans don't necessarily "choose" not to vote? I can tell you I legitimately chose not to vote over convenience, but not everyone is in that boat. It's not a red herring for anything to do with lobbyists. No one I've ever talked to said "All those damn lobbyists" is the reason they don't vote. Are you intimating that lobbyists are for some reason concerned with who votes, and not in fact who's in office that they can influence? To a true lobbyist the party doesn't matter, it's your agenda, and there are lobbyists on both sides.
ETA: "CHoose not to vote" is different from "My vote didn't count" which is different from "I voted for a losing candidate." I thought you said originally that 100M Americans choose not to vote then at least implied it had something to do with lobbyists. While the ends might actually have something to do with lobbyists, lobbyists seems like a very small reason that someone who DIDN'T VOTE "chose" not to vote. You asked about research, I thought you had a poll or something that said "among the top five reasons people choose not to vote? Lobbyists is number three." Sounds like we're on a different path.
-->
@ludofl3x
Out of the big 3 in DC, the Speaker of the house, the Majority Senate leader, and the President, who has the most power and responsibility for crafting Federal legislation in your opinion?
-->
@Greyparrot
An argument that without knowledge or understanding of government and politics, how can people's votes be genuine/meaningful?
-->
@Lemming
An argument that without knowledge or understanding of government and politics, how can people's votes be genuine/meaningful?
The answer to post #70 has a lot to say about the some of the reasons why people choose to not vote.
-->
@Greyparrot
Don't lose the thread: is there some research somewhere that show a plurality of eligible voters choose not to vote because lobbyists? You're not going to address how 100M AMericans don't necessarily "choose" not to vote?
If you want to make the "votes don't count" argument, I'd say the Supreme Court is a better practical example at the moment. Alito, Roberts, Kavanaugh, Barret and Gorsuch are all appointed by Presidents who lost the popular vote. There are only nine judges.
And for my money it's the Senate Majority leader. It's a problem, but I also happen to think that 2 senators per state is not the right way to go. There are more people in my county than there are in either Dakota.
-->
@ludofl3x
And for my money it's the Senate Majority leader.
Have you voted for the Senator you wanted every election? If not, why not?
-->
@Greyparrot
I already told you I didn't vote until 2019. I voted for both Senators I wanted to in 2020. The reason i didn't do so before was because I didn't want to go stand in line.
Don't lose the thread: is there some research somewhere that show a plurality of eligible voters choose not to vote because lobbyists? You're not going to address how 100M AMericans don't necessarily "choose" not to vote?
No?
-->
@ludofl3x
The reason i didn't do so before was because I didn't want to go stand in line.
What would it take for you to believe your vote for your Senator was worth a wait in a line?
Essentially, what would the circumstances have to be that you would endure the hardship of a line waiting similar to paying for groceries?
That your vote matters more than a weekly food gathering?
-->
@Greyparrot
Essentially, what would the circumstances have to be that you would endure the hardship of a line waiting similar to paying for groceries?
Convenient. That's all it took. It's not that I didn't think my vote counted, which are two different things.
-->
@ludofl3x
Convenient. That's all it took. It's not that I didn't think my vote counted, which are two different things.
And that's the problem. When people need a convenient reason to vote, it lessens the actual importance of the vote.
If A Democracy hinges on the same convenience as waiting in line for food, then it's already doomed. One would think a vote should matter more than hopping in line to get a 6 pack of beer.
When it doesn't, then we all deserve the mess we currently have in DC.
-->
@Greyparrot
Not at all. Do you really believe people choosing to not vote makes for a strong democracy?
I believe that the more people who vote the better, it helps to ensure that the government’s values reflect the values of the people they govern.
That has nothing to do with my comment however. As long as everyone has the right and an equal opportunity to vote, the government has done all it can do there. What I was talking about was legitimacy, which comes from people believing that the election was fair and that the person who takes office is the person who actually received the most votes.
So do you disagree with my statement that in order for a democracy to thrive the people must see it’s election results as legitimate?
-->
@Greyparrot
If A Democracy hinges on the same convenience as waiting in line for food, then it's already doomed. One would think a vote should matter more than hopping in line to get a 6 pack of beer.
The problem isn’t that people think their vote doesn’t count because there is something wrong with the system, the problem is just math. There are millions of people in this country, the chances that any one person’s vote will decide an election are infinitesimally small, so most people just don’t consider it worth their time to cast a vote that won’t change anything. And because of that, the way to win elections is to get people angry, because for many that is what it takes to motivate them to make the effort. This is the problem. People don’t get angry when the government does its job, so politicians are incentivized to focus all their attention on dividing us and demonizing the other side as opposed to actually governing.
So what’s the solution to this? Well, mail in ballots go a long way to minimizing the power of anger in our politics, but of course when you’re a party who has nothing but anger to sell to your voters you will naturally fight tooth and nail to ensure vote by mail is minimized.
-->
@Double_R
So what’s the solution to this? Well, mail in ballots go a long way to minimizing the power of anger in our politics
It would also go a long way to ensure a person's vote shouldn't be earned when it is worth less hassle than getting a 6 pack of beer. Lowering the expectations of politicians is a race to the bottom. It's clear people should be doing more due diligence and putting in more effort to fix DC than the effort it takes to buy a case of beer. Even if beer is getting more expensive lately.
-->
@Double_R
So do you disagree with my statement that in order for a democracy to thrive the people must see it’s election results as legitimate?
I agree with you.
And the 100 million who don't vote every year is testament to currently how little so many people care about the importance of Democracy or election results.
-->
@Double_R
so politicians are incentivized to focus all their attention on dividing us and demonizing the other side as opposed to actually governing.
Which has everything to do about shifting blame from the government to the people and nothing to do with preserving Democracy. When the people refuse to hold DC accountable, it's a testament to how weak our Democracy already is.
What would you change to hold DC accountable?
-->
@Greyparrot
I agree with you.
Great. So if the legitimacy (measured by the people’s confidence in the alignment between who the majority of voters chose and who actually takes office), then how do you square that with a former president who to this day continues to spread his lie that the election was stolen and the republican party’s embrace of it? Isn’t the republican party then the anti democracy party?
So what’s the solution to this? Well, mail in ballots go a long way to minimizing the power of anger in our politicsIt would also go a long way to ensure a person's vote shouldn't be earned when it is worth less hassle than getting a 6 pack of beer. Lowering the expectations of politicians is a race to the bottom.
You cannot argue that the lack of voter participation is a bad thing while advocating against making voting easier. You either value voter participation or you don’t. Pick one.
Which has everything to do about shifting blame from the government to the people and nothing to do with preserving Democracy. When the people refuse to hold DC accountable, it's a testament to how weak our Democracy already is.What would you change to hold DC accountable?
It’s not about shifting blame, the people are to blame. That’s the whole point of democracy, it’s success depends on the people and right now the people are getting the government they deserve.
Just look at how far we’ve come since Trump took office. Once upon a time it used to matter when a politician lied, said stupid things, or conducted themselves in a childish and crass manor. Then Trump came along and showed DC that the people don’t care about any of that, so now more and more politicians lie, say stupid things like it’s for sport, and act like a complete ass because they know the voters will not hold them accountable. We have have guys like Jim Jordan who’s never written a bill in his life but is on Twitter and Fox News every day pretending he’s battling the evil libs. And what happens? He gets re-elected.
Our politicians are a reflection of us, and what we care about they will focus on. It’s not DC that needs fixing, it’s us.
You either value voter participation or you don’t. Pick one.
I value quality over quantity. Is that wrong? I'd rather have voters who care enough about voting to make an effort instead of excuses.
It’s not about shifting blame, the people are to blame.
Here is where we part ways. To continue to believe the lies DC says about the faults of the public can only end in civil war, and I would rather that happen after I am dead.
Our politicians are a reflection of us, and what we care about they will focus on. It’s not DC that needs fixing, it’s us.
Well I can certainly guarantee making voting easier than getting a beer isn't going to help. Holding the government accountable isn't something to be taken lightly, but the government has brainwashed everyone that it must be taken lightly and even lighter still.
Our politicians are a reflection of us, and what we care about they will focus on. It’s not DC that needs fixing, it’s us.
100 million people disagree. They also don't give a fuck about your fanfiction regarding the former president. The removal of the former president hasn't improved the standard of living for anyone in America outside of DC, and it appears that about 37 percent of the people don't give a fuck about that either.
-->
@Greyparrot
And that's the problem. When people need a convenient reason to vote, it lessens the actual importance of the vote.
So are we totally dropping lobbyists as the problem for 100M Americans, as the reason they choose not to vote?
And are you saying voting SHOULD be difficult to do, this way votes are somehow weightier than...other votes? Let's say you live above a polling station, and I live 40 miles from one. We both vote. Is my vote more "important" than yours? I'm just trying to understand what you're even arguing at this point.
I didn't need a "convenient reason" to vote. I needed voting to be more accessible in order exercise my right as an American.
And the 100 million who don't vote every year is testament to currently how little so many people care about the importance of Democracy or election results.
Couldn't it also be a testament to how difficult it can be to vote in certain places? Do you think mail in voting, widespread, automatically getting a ballot, do you think that would reduce the 100M number?
I value quality over quantity. Is that wrong? I'd rather have voters who care enough about voting to make an effort instead of excuses.
It's not wrong, it's just unAmerican and antidemocratic. One person, one vote. Very simple.
So are we totally dropping lobbyists as the problem for 100M Americans, as the reason they choose not to vote?
Your insistence throughout this thread conflating dissatisfaction with corruption in DC as THE reason instead of A reason makes me think you are here to troll and not participate in good faith. I've been trying to ignore it up to now but you seem to be fixated and biased, and that's a shame.
it's just unAmerican and antidemocratic
It's actually a new tradition especially with technology to make voting easier than shopping for a beer. With that convenience comes real consequences. A democracy built on snap judgements in the heat of a fickle moment is much weaker than one where the choices are well thought out.
Imagine if this convenience extended to the legal system where jury members could simply swipe their phones or mail in a paper instead of deliberating for days in a sequestered room? Would you trust your life to that new tradition of convenient democracy? Would that be "American"?
We are currently dealing with the consequences of that new tradition today with increasing unresponsiveness from everyone in DC, when they are not busy laughing at questions or walking away from reporters.
Your insistence throughout this thread conflating dissatisfaction with corruption in DC as THE reason instead of A reason makes me think you are here to troll and not participate in good faith. I've been trying to ignore it up to now but you seem to be fixated and biased, and that's a shame.
I wasn't the one who brought up lobbyists as to why 100M americans don't vote. Or corruption in general.
It's actually a new tradition especially with technology to make voting easier than shopping for a beer. With that convenience comes real consequences.
Every American has the RIGHT to vote. It should be convenient as buying a beer. There's no argument against it unless you don't want people to vote. If you don't want it to be convenient, then I guess it's a little weird to criticize 100M people who didn't vote, but if you want voter participation, 2020 is a practical example that convenience makes for more voter participation. More votes cast than in any other election and not close.
-->
@ludofl3x
I wasn't the one who brought up lobbyists as to why 100M americans don't vote. Or corruption in general.
No, And I never presented a myopic argument conflating the reasons why 100M people do not participate in today's modern version of Democracy. Yet this is what you choose to waste my time discussing. I am really disappointed.
I guess it's a little weird to criticize 100M people who didn't vote
That's your opinion. If you are flippant with people opting out of Democracy, I find it equally weird that you do not think it fundamentally weakens it.
-->
@ludofl3x
It should be convenient as buying a beer.
And with that "should" comes new consequences. You and DoubleR advocate for remove the cooling down period for voting and with the same breath lament the amount of people responding and voting due to "anger politics"
The amount of people voting may be at an all time high today due to this new tradition of instant Democracy, but so are the monumental amount of people with voter regrets.
Every American has the RIGHT to vote.
We have a right to own a firearm too but we sensibly know that removing the cooldown periods to buy one to prevent people from making long lasting snap decisions in anger would be foolish and socially irresponsible. A convenient vote in anger is even more catastrophic because the government has much more power to take life than any one individual and the impacts can last beyond any one individual's life for generations.
It's an actual problem to be discussed and not be swept under a haze of biased partisan rhetoric. Every American is directly paying for this right now.