Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Is it un-American to choose NOT to vote?

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 11:36 PM
link   
The People who don't vote are the ones who SHOULD be allowed to complain, not the ones who vote.

Casting your vote is basically saying, "I am putting the decisions made in our government in the hands of this guy."

If your candidate doesn't win, then complaining is just being a sore loser, and If he does win, then you've already stated by voting that you want him to represent you in your government, and make the decisions for you, reguardless of what you believe should be done.




posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 01:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


Months ago I had been seriously planning to vote for Kucinich, it was very depressing to hear he'd dropped out of the race!



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by elevatedone
 





I wouldn't say un-American, it's a choice. That being said, those who don't vote shouldn't complain about politics or our politicians.


A vote is an endorsement. Would you endorse Obama or McCain? I personally cannot, and to vote for them with this in mind would be Unamerican.




I don't know, I'm one who thinks in simple terms, no vote = no complaining.


In a system that I believe to be corrupt, why wouldn't I have the prerogative to complain if I chose not to engage in a corrupt system?

reply to post by Mercenary2007
 


If I refuse to take part in a corrupt system, that gives me MORE of a right to complain than if you validated the system with a vote.

“If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal.” -Emma Goldman



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 11:21 AM
link   
All this "if you don't vote you have no right to complain" is a load of horsecrap.The simple fact of the matter is it really does not matter who gets elected because both parties have been bought and sold to the real owners of this nation these elections are simply apart of the show.I think it's sad that alot of people still cling to the illusion that our vote actually counts.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 01:01 PM
link   
I am going to do what most should do. I am going to write in Ron Paul. A vote thrown away? maybe, but I can't wait to see the media announce
"a surprising turn of events, it seems that Ron Paul actually had real people who voted for him. Not just the electoral college. Who would have thought?"
Hopefully we will have access to archived internet files in the future and we can sit around and watch videos of Ron Paul and Newt Gengrich telling anyone who will listen that the bailout is gong to ruin our country. We can toast our vodka and say hail Amerika! hail Vladimere! hail communism!
(so as not to go against the grain)



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Not voting isn't un-American. In fact some people shouldn't vote and do America a favor. If you don't work or pay taxes and live off the government then you shouldn't vote. Or this is a good example of some who should never vote when they have no idea what they are talking about or what the candidate's issues are.


If you work hard and pay taxes then you have a right to complain whether you vote or not. Some people I've talked to think neither candidate is worth it and it doesn't matter if they vote or not because America is voting on looks and presentation and not the real issues. The biggest percentage of the votes are going to be for Obama & McCain and the rest to the other candidates. I'm voting no matter what.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Learn from the election process. The candidates will teach us how to act. Remember that it is just a two party system and the electoral vote is all that counts not popular vote. So be knowledgeable of your local candidates. The country's going global anyways and the global corporations really run it all. Usually, the candidate endorsed by General Electric will win.

[edit on 23-10-2008 by TamtammyMacx]



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 



There is a reason we do not go with the popular vote though. If we were to go with that, then the big states California, New York, etc. would be the only ones with a voice. They have different issues than we do here in the midwest. This way, gives all of us a voice.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Solarskye
 



Originally posted by Solarskye
Not voting isn't un-American. In fact some people shouldn't vote and do America a favor. If you don't work or pay taxes and live off the government then you shouldn't vote.


That actually makes sense.

I might come around to that way of thinking. hmmm



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by mrsdudara
 


That's fine if you agree with that position, but I do not. I think it should be 100% popular vote so that it is truly our votes that are counted.

Think about it though. Earlier you said people were fighting so 'we', as in individuals, would have 'a say'. What you just acknowledged and accepted was that it's really the States that have the 'say'. That is not what was being fought for.

Also, you have to accept then that we as individual voters are indirectly voting. That the popular vote (our voice) is not guaranteed to have any bearing on the outcome. This has happened already with three Presidencies I believe; when the President with the popular vote lost.

So... I am curious let's say you Vote for John McCain (an example I am not making assumptions) and John McCain ends up winning the Popular Vote. Then the Electoral College elects Barak Obama. I am just curious, will you feel like you had 'a say'?

[edit on 23-10-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by DINSTAAR
 



DINSTAAR... you've got a good grasp of the slippery ground burrower...
i.e. the election processes

My vote or vote via non-vote...is my choice to make...
& yes i do have a right to complain about our future predicuments,
even though i did not vote for either of the 'choices' presented myself/us.
(see the vote vs. non-vote logic...as being the choice between all 19 candidates)


i'm still voting Nader , for yet another election cycle
thanks,



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 



Earlier you said people were fighting so 'we', as in individuals, would have 'a say'. What you just acknowledged and accepted was that it's really the States that have the 'say'. That is not what was being fought for.


Yes it is the States that have the say. We have a say in what our State votes for. I agree with that system. I do not think every decision should be decided by the high populated coastal towns.


Also, you have to accept then that we as individual voters are indirectly voting. That the popular vote (our voice) is not guaranteed to have any bearing on the outcome. This has happened already with three Presidencies I believe; when the President with the popular vote lost.


We voted for the people whos vote counted as well - or at least we were supposed to. Some people decided not to vote, thinking it did not matter.


So... I am curious let's say you Vote for John McCain (an example I am not making assumptions) and John McCain ends up winning the Popular Vote. Then the Electoral College elects Barak Obama. I am just curious, will you feel like you had 'a say'?


Yes Im voting for McCain, and yes I would still feel like I had a voice.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrsdudara
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


They should still vote, because their vote could still be counted. They could fix the problem.

Another point....a lot of people died so you could stand up and have a say. A lot of women were tortured and died so that women could stand up and have a say. Same goes for blacks. Obviously your opinion, your vote matters. Even if you have to choose between two turd heads like these. Your vote matters so much, that other people before you, laid their lives down. Dude! That is cool. Dont waste a perfectly good voice.


The problem is that not only is our system corrupt, but our votes don't mean anything by design. Electoral votes determine the president, not ours. Look at the 2000 election: Al Gore vs. George Bush. Al Gore got 48.38% of the popular vote, George Bush got 47.87% of the popular vote. The people voted for Al Gore, however a corrupt house of representatives voted for George Bush.

Not voting doesn't mean you're "Un-American" it just means you see through the lies.

You're right. A lot of people suffered, bled, and died to give our people freedom. I wonder when we will see it?

www.infoplease.com...



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrsdudara

Yes it is the States that have the say. We have a say in what our State votes for. I agree with that system.


You mentioned earlier that each State has its own reasons for wanting a particular President. Fine...but what about every other State? If you are voting for a President for our entire Nation then one should not be making a decision based on how much it will benefit the State they live in. It should be for everyone....

I mean... we are talking about what is "American" and "un-American" after all right? So we should be thinking about how the President will help all States. Therefore imho the best way to assess that fairness is by counting everyones individual vote.


I do not think every decision should be decided by the high populated coastal towns


If it was popular vote then why would it equate to that? Not everyone votes the same in these big coastal cities. They are generally more blue sure, but most states are more red. It averages out. But all that is besides my point. I believe in the People. I would rather it be Our Voice.

[edit on 23-10-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 



If you are voting for a President for our entire Nation then one should not be making a decision based on how much it will benefit the State they live in. It should be for everyone....


I disagree. I think each person should vote according to what is best for them and their state. They have no business voting on what is better for others that they have no knowledge of.

It is the "United States" of America. That is how it is supposed to be run. Each state does what is best for them, and we unite as a country. We started having the big problems when the Federal government started medeling with states in attempt to run us as a whole. The big changes started the Civil War. That was when the big change started and the big corperations, the Federal govt. started taking over.

What helped keep us a free nation was each state being run as its own unit. State decided their own laws, they decided how to educate their youth, they even had their own armys (national guard). The armys were supposed to unite when the country needed to fight as a whole. One by one everything started changing and more and more people forgot. Now look at the mess we are in.

I see the change from electorial to popular being a big breaking point. The final change from the United States of America to North American Union. THAT is not ok with me.


Peskyhumans, that is in reply to yours as well.

[edit on 24-10-2008 by mrsdudara]



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


On the contrary...not voting for a regime disguised as a bipartisan sytem does not nullify one's right to "bitch". Black and white thinking dominates the two party dialectic. Tryanny has many faces, in our system it is a matter of spin and not actual susbstance. The right to bitch is inaliable and not contingent upon an individual's predellection toward right or left leaning control systems. Protesting is in opposition to ALL forms of central control. Why vote when choice is restricted to obvious delineations of a central meme and does not represent any opposing, viable path? You are buying into it. Not voting can be a powerful choice if it is a personal demonstration against the prevailing regime. Your vote, aware or not, for either party is a vote for tyrannical control at this juncture. Refuse to play. Look to something beyond the illusion.



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by mrsdudara
 


Well then you should backtrack to what you said earlier about people fighting for it, because that is not what they fought for


It was popular vote originally, and that is what was fought for.

I don't personally see what you are getting at with the people voting for with their States in mind. What would be some of the reasons? Maybe you can illustrate that a little more before I know how to respond.

We have Mayors and Governors for this purpose no?

Some food for thought: if everyone chose not to vote, the Electoral College would still choose a President. At which point we would have to wonder if they would have picked that President regardless


[edit on 24-10-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 11:20 PM
link   
If you were born in America, whatever you do is American, because it is the people of America that define what it is to be American.

It is in your best interest to vote, unless you live in Florida, in which case, your vote will not be counted. If you actually agree with any of the candidates, vote for those candidates you agree with. It will not hurt you to vote.

On the other hand, if you do not like any of the current candidates in a particular race, by all means, leave it blank. Choosing the lesser of the evils is what has gotten countries into trouble time and again. Doing that could possibly give a mandate to the candidate you saw as the lesser of the evils, when, in fact, they merely squeaked by based on being less evil than the other person. Giving the lesser of the evils a mandate leads to mediocrity in public life becoming "acceptable" in the political climate of your country. Mediocrity in government will destroy a country. Mediocrity is akin to apathy. Apathy combined with excess are a couple of major flaws in government that will destroy entire civilizations.

[edit on 24-10-2008 by Rusty P. Shackleford]



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 02:38 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

I wouldn't say "unamerican" at all. IMHO, it would be irresposible. A society is only as good as the people in it, same goes with the political process. The more people involved, at every level, the better...

"Unamerican"? No.

Any change in the political process requires peoples input, if you opt out, and others go with you, where's the change going to come from? Think about that, before deciding not to help in the decision process.




As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


I would say it hardly matters if you vote or don't vote. In my opinion, if not one single person in America voted, there would still be a president elected. How can that be? I think the numbers are fudged completely. That is how a two party system stays in the lead. A third party can't get in because the electoral college will never vote a third party in. The crazy thing is, the electoral college can vote however they choose. If an entire state's population voted democratic, the electoral college votes for that state can still go republican.

YOUR VOTE DOES NOT MATTER!

I won't be voting because I have lost my right to vote, but then again, I never voted to begin with. I was all upset about not being able to vote until I took a serious look at this "right" to vote. It is nothing more than a way for the politicians to blame the government on the people and make the average joe think he has a voice. You have no voice because ultimately, you have no vote. The elite already know who will be president, and probably even the one after that.






top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join