Political Theory → Discussion•
Voting


Sponsor
Thomas-JeffersonNov 7, 2006 3:38am
The upcoming american congresional elections got me thinking about voting. We need to change the way we vote in america. Despite widespread dissatisfaction with Bush, the Iraq war, and leftist hype about a democratic victory in the elections today, Republicans actually vote, unlike teens and radicals.

look at this:



There are alot of things that could be done, from changing the way we vote - rangevoting.org [rangevoting.org] for example, or perhaps requiring citizens to vote, as I hear they do in australia. I see Switzerland as the high standard of democracy today, but the United States has staked its reputation on being the champion of democracy...

Things like the electoral college and two-party politics have got to go if we're to regain our ideals...
1623984Nov 7, 2006 7:09pm
I wonder if it's a matter of class. In other words, the poorer Democrats are challenged by transportation needs, or lack of transportation. They may have to work unusually long hours, two, three jobs. I'm not saying it's THE factor. But, it must amount to some lack of voting.


On the other hand, as a personal note, I said to my wife this evening < "If this election is stolen, I'm done. I won't vote again." So, disenchantment with the system, voting irregularities, lack of a real good choice, etc.....also plays a part.

I don't know if either party really represents a large portion of the people.


Then there's just people who would rather get high. Or people who wanna watch TV. They just aren't interested at all.

I think those are some factors. I dont think they tell the whole story...and were probably explained poorly (lazy posting...that's my fault)But, who wants to write a book on the subject in an SU forum?

Sponsor
Thomas-JeffersonNov 8, 2006 4:53am
Democrats aren't poorer. Despite the fact that blacks are the most consistant voters for the democratic party, democrats are on average wealthy urbanites, and republicans poor rural americans.
1623984Nov 9, 2006 1:23am
I should have left out the democrat part and just said poor voters in general.

Sponsor
Thomas-JeffersonNov 9, 2006 2:45am
Check this out:

www-personal.umich.edu/%7emejn/election/2006/ [www-personal.umich.edu/%7emejn/election/2006/]
1623984Nov 9, 2006 4:37pm
Looks a lot different from the last race.


Young people voted this time around...in record numbers....or so I hear.

huffingtonpost.com/2006/11/09/young-voter-turnout-highe_n_33709.html [huffingtonpost.com/2006/11/09/young-voter-turnout-highe_n_33709.html]

I don't know...you keep hearing that voting is a waste of time. It's easy to be cynical. It's easy to drop-out.
I do it cause I like to do it. It's a community thing. I'm pretty anti-social in most regards. But, I enjoy being in the company of people come to vote. There's a sense of anticipation and hope. And maybe it's delusional, in the end. But, I do it anyway. I'll always vote.

Sponsor
MorosophJun 30, 2007 7:07am
People generally underestimate their influence in voting for a minority party.

Cut and paste job:

There has been a lot of discussion about wasted votes, the importance of voting, etcetera. I would like to ask people to vote for a "minor" party.

Here's why:

  • You communicate the most information with a "minority" choice.

  • You are actively voting for diversity of representation.

  • Your intent will affect the mood of the local population proportionately†, and could therefore win more support for your cause.

  • Your vote will give strength to would-be third party voters in future elections.

  • Whoever gets elected, they will want to win the next election, and you have given them some indication how to win your vote. You could find yourself better represented than many voters for that candidate.


†I did some canvassing for a centrist, socially liberal party in Britain a few years ago. One strategy was to go after the vote of the less-supported "main" party, which resulted in an equal number of votes falling from the other party, now that their provisional supporters felt less threatened. Voters do sense the intentions of their immediate community when making their own judgements on how to vote.

Sponsor
Thomas-JeffersonJun 30, 2007 11:56am
good point

unfortunately all too many people want to be on the winning team...

There are a number of alternate voting schemes which have proven themselves well in academic votes or other smaller venues.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_system [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_system]

Sponsor
MorosophJun 30, 2007 12:05pm
I know. It's daft, for it's a sure way to give the candidate your own power, carte blanche.

At the very least if you vote for the apparent runner-up, you make whoever gets in sweat a little...

I'm aware of alternate voting schemes. Condorcet looks pretty good, but Approval voting will probably appeal more to those wanting to boost the vote those not bright enough to order their preferences.

Really, my point is that you don't need these "incentives" to vote for someone who you wouldn't mind in; there are good reasons to do just that in any case, which become stronger still if you look to the future.

Sponsor
Thomas-JeffersonJun 30, 2007 12:08pm
I've always followed your advice, even tho I only just now heard it ;) I only vote for the major parties in the primary, and then for the candidate I wanted to see winning (who so far has always been third party) in the general election. Sadly in 2004 I had no one I wanted to see win, so I abstained.


Voting

You need to Sign-up for StumbleUpon to post to this forum