Does the act of not voting invalidate one's political opinions?

[Rozman]

This thread is in response to a post by Grampa Murked U.

No vote = keep your opinion to yourself imo

I decided several months ago that come November I was not going to bother to vote in the general election. I can't vote for either Obama or Romney, since they're essentially clones of one another, and while I might throw Gary Johnson a vote if there was another race, such as Senate or House, that had a candidate worth supporting he isn't good enough on his own to warrant taking the time out of my day to go vote for him.

So should my opinion be invalidated despite the fact that my decision not to vote is as principled as anybody's decision to vote, and not simply motivated by apathy?

You want to sit out the election or just not vote for a Presidential candidate...
Maybe you might want to consider the rest of the ballot and someone there to your liking.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It's a trick question worded to allow for an argument no matter the answer. Only an idiot would say you aren't allowed to have an opinion. But if you don't bother to vote I just don't care what it is.

I think that's what Grampa was actually saying, however. I don't think his point was that I somehow actually lose my right to an opinion.

The point, however, is why does the act of not voting make you not care what somebody else's opinion is, especially when their act of not voting is as principled as anybody else's choice to vote?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So should my opinion be invalidated despite the fact that my decision not to vote is as principled as anybody's decision to vote, and not simply motivated by apathy?

Yes.

Why?

 

[The Rabbi]

You can choose not to vote. But don't bitch when things dont turn out like you want.

Sorry but somebody who is bitching about a president and who voted for the other guy is no different from a person bitching about a president who voted for neither of the guys.

If he voted for someone else, fine. If he decided, a plague on all your houses, then he gave up a fundamental right and deserves what he gets.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

This thread is in response to a post by Grampa Murked U.

No vote = keep your opinion to yourself imo

I decided several months ago that come November I was not going to bother to vote in the general election. I can't vote for either Obama or Romney, since they're essentially clones of one another, and while I might throw Gary Johnson a vote if there was another race, such as Senate or House, that had a candidate worth supporting he isn't good enough on his own to warrant taking the time out of my day to go vote for him.

So should my opinion be invalidated despite the fact that my decision not to vote is as principled as anybody's decision to vote, and not simply motivated by apathy?

I don't think it invalidates your voice....I wanted Hillary for President, couldn't vote for Obama because I couldn't stand the way his team and followers treated Hillary and I couldn't stand how the DNC TOOK Hillary delegates/john edwards delegates and gave them to Obama in a back room deal, and McCain was just Bush light to me....so in good conscience...I just could not cast a vote for president at the time. Voting for the lesser of 2 evils, is sometimes just simply supporting evil....

Though A write in name would be more of a statement!

I could write Ron Paul's name in, and I considered doing that for a while. But the fact that it literally wouldn't be counted at all and would simply be thrown in the trash makes me feel like that's not much of a statement.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You can choose not to vote. But don't bitch when things dont turn out like you want.

So if I went and voted Gary Johnson I could complain when things don't turn out like I want, but if I decide that even Gary Johnson isn't worth the effort I can't despite the fact that nothing at all will be any different.

Why?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

George Carlin - Voting - YouTube

I knew it was only a matter of time.

He has a point though.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I used to think so.

But, really I think it's just a way to try and invalidate a choice someone has and try to force their hand in choosing a person they really don't want to vote for.

When facing two choices that you don't like, you shouldn't be expected to vote for one of them in order to validate your political opinions.

Maybe you should write in a choice instead? Though, honestly simple logic would show that a write in has absolutely no chance and is basically equivalent of just not voting.

I'm fine with people not voting. I want people INVOLVED in the process. I want people to fight to pick their candidates. But if in the end that candidate and the other is not someone they want to see as President, I think it's cool if they simply just don't vote for them.

Your refusal to choose between two(or three) candidates is an equally important choice as voting for them.

I think that's exactly the point as well.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

This thread is in response to a post by Grampa Murked U.

No vote = keep your opinion to yourself imo

I decided several months ago that come November I was not going to bother to vote in the general election. I can't vote for either Obama or Romney, since they're essentially clones of one another, and while I might throw Gary Johnson a vote if there was another race, such as Senate or House, that had a candidate worth supporting he isn't good enough on his own to warrant taking the time out of my day to go vote for him.

So should my opinion be invalidated despite the fact that my decision not to vote is as principled as anybody's decision to vote, and not simply motivated by apathy?

You want to sit out the election or just not vote for a Presidential candidate...
Maybe you might want to consider the rest of the ballot and someone there to your liking.

My Senate race is between Sherrod Brown, Josh Mandel, and a bunch of third party candidates. I can't vote for Brown considering his economic positions, and he's not very good on foreign policy with Obama in office either, and Mandel is one of the most corrupt politicians I've ever seen. The rest of the field are a bunch of nobodies who aren't very great either. My House race is between Rep. Bob Gibbs, an establishment Republican, and Joyce Healy-Abrams, an establishment Democrat. Both are useless. My state races aren't worth mentioning either.

 

[The Rabbi]

You can choose not to vote. But don't bitch when things dont turn out like you want.

So if I went and voted Gary Johnson I could complain when things don't turn out like I want, but if I decide that even Gary Johnson isn't worth the effort I can't despite the fact that nothing at all will be any different.

Why?

Because it will teach you that voting for losers like Gary Johnson is not a winner and we have a two party system for a reason.

 

[Neurotika]

I see your point, Kevin, and I am very nearly in your camp. I was going to sit out the election as well.

But then Romney veered all right-wing extremist, and he started scaring me. I'm afraid that he is so in bed with wingnuts that he will damage the Supreme Court (through Clarence Thomas-like appointments) that we won't even have the semblance of a democracy remaining.

(Hell, with an entirely Republican supreme court, they may legalize using auctions in place of elections. Corporations could use their money to bid for and buy politicians as a "free speech" variant.)

So I will vote Obama as an anti-Romney vote. I view Romney as corrupt, stupid, odd, disconnected, and completely untrustworthy.

At least Obama is just your run-of-mill corporate tool.

the supreme court is the big scarey for me too. i like jill stein..and even some of gary johnson and i wish they would get more attention..

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You can choose not to vote. But don't bitch when things dont turn out like you want.

So if I went and voted Gary Johnson I could complain when things don't turn out like I want, but if I decide that even Gary Johnson isn't worth the effort I can't despite the fact that nothing at all will be any different.

Why?

Because it will teach you that voting for losers like Gary Johnson is not a winner and we have a two party system for a reason.

Sounds like a good reason not to vote.

 

[Neurotika]

Why is the USA in trouble

From the experience of an airport ticket agent. Must read!
This is priceless funny stuff.

An airport ticket agent tells some examples of 'why' the United States is in trouble:

1. I had a New Hampshire Congresswoman (Carol Shea-Porter) ask for an aisle seat so that her hair wouldn't get messed up by being near the window. (On an airplane!)

2. I got a call from a Kansas Congressman's (Moore) staffer (Howard Bauleke), who wanted to go to Capetown. I started to explain the length of the flight and the passport information, and then he interrupted me with, ''I'm not trying to make you look stupid, but Capetown is in Massachusetts .....''
Without trying to make him look stupid, I calmly explained, ''Cape Cod is in Massachusetts , Capetown is in Africa .''
His response -- click.

3. A senior Vermont Congressman (Bernie Sanders) called, furious about a Florida package we did. I asked what was wrong with the vacation in Orlando . He said he was expecting an ocean-view room. I tried to explain that's not possible, since Orlando is in the middle of the state.
He replied, 'don't lie to me, I looked on the map and Florida is a very thin state!'' (OMG)

4. I got a call from a lawmaker's wife (Landra Reid) who asked, ''Is it possible to see England from Canada ?''
I said, ''No.''
She said, ''But they look so close on the map.'' (OMG, again!)

5. An aide for a cabinet member(Janet Napolitano) once called and asked if he could rent a car in Dallas . I pulled up the reservation and noticed he had only a 1-hour layover in Dallas . When I asked him why he wanted to rent a car, he said, ''I heard Dallas was a big airport, and we will need a car to drive between gates to save time.''(Aghhhh)

6. An Illinois Congresswoman (Jan Schakowsky) called last week. She needed to know how it was possible that her flight from Detroit left at 8:30 a.m., and got to Chicago at 8:33 a.m.
I explained that Michigan was an hour ahead of Illinois , but she couldn't understand the concept of time zones. Finally, I told her the plane went fast, and she bought that.

7. A New York lawmaker, (Jerrold Nadler) called and asked, ''Do airlines put your physical description on your bag so they know whose luggage belongs to whom?'' I said, 'No, why do you ask?'
He replied, ''Well, when I checked in with the airline, they put a tag on my luggage that said (FAT), and I'm overweight. I think that's very rude!''
After putting him on hold for a minute, while I looked into it. (I was dying laughing). I came back and explained the city code for Fresno , Ca. is FAT ( Fresno Air Terminal), and the airline was just putting a destination tag on his luggage.

8. A Senator John Kerry aide (Lindsay Ross) called to inquire about a trip package to Hawaii . After going over all the cost info, she asked, ''Would it be cheaper to fly to California and then take the train to Hawaii ?''

9. I just got off the phone with a freshman Congressman, Bobby Bright from Ala who asked, ''How do I know which plane to get on?''
I asked him what exactly he meant, to which he replied, ''I was told my flight number is 823, but none of these planes have that number on them.''

10. Senator Dianne Feinstein called and said, ''I need to fly to Pepsi-Cola , Florida . Do I have to get on one of those little computer planes?''
I asked if she meant fly to Pensacola , FL on a commuter plane.
She said, ''Yeah, whatever, smarty!''

11. Mary Landrieu , La. Senator called and had a question about the documents she needed in order to fly to China . After a lengthy discussion about passports, I reminded her that she needed a visa. 'Oh, no I don't. I've been to China many times and never had to have one of those.''
I double checked and sure enough, her stay required a visa. When I told her this she said, ''Look, I've been to China four times and every time they have accepted my American Express!''

12. A New Jersey Congressman (John Adler) called to make reservations, ''I want to go from Chicago to Rhino, New York .''
I was at a loss for words. Finally, I said, ''Are you sure that's the name of the town?''
'Yes, what flights do you have?'' replied the man.
After some searching, I came back with, ''I'm sorry, sir, I've looked up every airport code in the country and can't find a rhino anywhere."
''The man retorted, ''Oh, don't be silly! Everyone knows where it is. Check your map!''
So I scoured a map of the state of New York and finally offered, ''You don't mean Buffalo , do you?''
The reply? ''Whatever! I knew it was a big animal.''

Now you know why the Government is in the shape that it's in!

Could anyone be this DUMB?

YES, THEY WALK AMONG US, ARE IN POLITICS,
AND THEY CONTINUE TO BREED.

debunked here:

snopes.com: Congressional Travelers Geography Bloopers

 

[The Rabbi]

So if I went and voted Gary Johnson I could complain when things don't turn out like I want, but if I decide that even Gary Johnson isn't worth the effort I can't despite the fact that nothing at all will be any different.

Why?

Because it will teach you that voting for losers like Gary Johnson is not a winner and we have a two party system for a reason.

Sounds like a good reason not to vote.

You could always move to Somalia.

 

[Cowman]

Because it will teach you that voting for losers like Gary Johnson is not a winner and we have a two party system for a reason.

Sounds like a good reason not to vote.

You could always move to Somalia.

Why would he move to Somalia? He has a vested interest in this country... and the two guys who are available to vote for do not work for his interests.

 

[Borillar]

This thread is in response to a post by Grampa Murked U.

No vote = keep your opinion to yourself imo

I decided several months ago that come November I was not going to bother to vote in the general election. I can't vote for either Obama or Romney, since they're essentially clones of one another, and while I might throw Gary Johnson a vote if there was another race, such as Senate or House, that had a candidate worth supporting he isn't good enough on his own to warrant taking the time out of my day to go vote for him.

So should my opinion be invalidated despite the fact that my decision not to vote is as principled as anybody's decision to vote, and not simply motivated by apathy?

Your opinion isn't invalidated, but then you can't really complain about the election's outcome either. I generally vote for the candidate or party platform that is closest to my viewpoint. That has meant occasionally voting third party. If there isn't someone to vote for, there is usually someone to vote against. At worst, you could always ask some well meaning fool and then vote the other way.

 

[dblack]

This thread is in response to a post by Grampa Murked U.

No vote = keep your opinion to yourself imo

I decided several months ago that come November I was not going to bother to vote in the general election. I can't vote for either Obama or Romney, since they're essentially clones of one another, and while I might throw Gary Johnson a vote if there was another race, such as Senate or House, that had a candidate worth supporting he isn't good enough on his own to warrant taking the time out of my day to go vote for him.

So should my opinion be invalidated despite the fact that my decision not to vote is as principled as anybody's decision to vote, and not simply motivated by apathy?

Of course not. Our election system is largely a manipulated sham. If anything can be said to invalidate one's political opinions, it's playing with a voting system that is worthless in its ability to represent them.

 

[dblack]

You can choose not to vote. But don't bitch when things dont turn out like you want.

So if I went and voted Gary Johnson I could complain when things don't turn out like I want, but if I decide that even Gary Johnson isn't worth the effort I can't despite the fact that nothing at all will be any different.

Why?

Because it will teach you that voting for losers like Gary Johnson is not a winner and we have a two party system for a reason.

LOL

Awesome answer.

 

[dblack]

Sounds like a good reason not to vote.

You could always move to Somalia.

Why would he move to Somalia? He has a vested interest in this country... and the two guys who are available to vote for do not work for his interests.

I wonder if Rabbi would be equally enthusiastic with a one-party system? I suspect so.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

This thread is in response to a post by Grampa Murked U.

No vote = keep your opinion to yourself imo

I decided several months ago that come November I was not going to bother to vote in the general election. I can't vote for either Obama or Romney, since they're essentially clones of one another, and while I might throw Gary Johnson a vote if there was another race, such as Senate or House, that had a candidate worth supporting he isn't good enough on his own to warrant taking the time out of my day to go vote for him.

So should my opinion be invalidated despite the fact that my decision not to vote is as principled as anybody's decision to vote, and not simply motivated by apathy?

Your opinion isn't invalidated, but then you can't really complain about the election's outcome either. I generally vote for the candidate or party platform that is closest to my viewpoint. That has meant occasionally voting third party. If there isn't someone to vote for, there is usually someone to vote against. At worst, you could always ask some well meaning fool and then vote the other way.

I feel like those are the same thing, frankly. Why can't I complain about the election if my opinion isn't invalidated?