View Poll Results: Do you vote?

Voters
98. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes: in all elections (national and local)

    60 61.22%
  • Yes: but only in national and some local

    17 17.35%
  • Yes: but only national

    2 2.04%
  • Maybe: it depends on the election

    7 7.14%
  • No: I'm not old enough, yet.

    1 1.02%
  • No: not at all

    5 5.10%
  • No: I'm not legally permitted

    1 1.02%
  • Other

    5 5.10%
Page 17 of 18 FirstFirst ... 715161718 LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 178

Thread: Do you vote? (poll)

  1. #161
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Do you vote? (poll)

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    That doesn't follow what I have seen. For example, a majority of Democrats in congress voted against the war in Iraq, independent of the party leaders who supported AOF in Iraq. If they had been independents, instead of Democrats, how would the end result have been any different?
    That just shows that in this rare case, the party leaders were not in step with the partisan lines.


    Why do you think that the end result of one vote in congress matters when the issue is that our government is minimally representative of it's people? Do you think that my position is affected in any way by this?

    If so, then you have continued to not understand my position.

    Refresh my memory, please.
    The proportions of democrats/republicans in elected office compared to the demographics of the nation.


    Not surprising, given the percentage of people that do not vote. You have to sit at the table if you want to be a part of the discussion.
    Are you actually completely ignorant of gerrymandering and it's effects on US elections, or are you just being obtuse for the sake of being obtuse?
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  2. #162
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Do you vote? (poll)

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    That just shows that in this rare case, the party leaders were not in step with the partisan lines.


    Why do you think that the end result of one vote in congress matters when the issue is that our government is minimally representative of it's people?
    Its not a single instance, here's another example: a large portion of House Democrats voted against Obama's compromise with the GOP in extending the Bush tax cuts in 2010.

    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll647.xml



    The proportions of democrats/republicans in elected office compared to the demographics of the nation.
    So that is all that would change after the civil war? No policy changes that better reflect all of the American people???




    Are you actually completely ignorant of gerrymandering and it's effects on US elections, or are you just being obtuse for the sake of being obtuse?
    I have never said I am opposed to redistricting reform.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  3. #163
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Do you vote? (poll)

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Its not a single instance, here's another example: a large portion of House Democrats voted against Obama's compromise with the GOP in extending the Bush tax cuts in 2010.

    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll647.xml
    They voted against the compromise. They didn't vote against the party line. They voted against straying from the party line. That doesn't really help your case.


    So that is all that would change after the civil war?
    When did I say there would be a civil war? Hint: I said the exact opposite about this issue. Stop being dishonest.

    No policy changes that better reflect all of the American people???
    I never said there'd be no policy changes, either. There would be policy changes, but you can't use policy-results from this ass-backwards system to predict how and where those changes would occur.


    I will say that there would be a significant decrease in voter apathy, a large increase in voter turnout, and far less disenfranchisement in the electorate.

    What happens to policies themselves after such a change is not nearly as predictable as those things are.


    I have never said I am opposed to redistricting reform.
    And how will you make it so that whatever reforms are put in place don't allow bipartisan attempts to crowd out third parties from winning elections if they do manage to have a successful grassroots effort to gain local support?

    Such bipartisan gerrymandering is relatively common today.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  4. #164
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Do you vote? (poll)

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    They voted against the compromise. They didn't vote against the party line. They voted against straying from the party line. That doesn't really help your case.
    They voted in opposition to what their party leaders wanted.



    When did I say there would be a civil war? Hint: I said the exact opposite about this issue. Stop being dishonest.
    Previously, you listed two ways that multi-party representation had come about. One was through violence and the other was to adopt the system through our political process.



    I never said there'd be no policy changes, either. There would be policy changes, but you can't use policy-results from this ass-backwards system to predict how and where those changes would occur.

    I will say that there would be a significant decrease in voter apathy, a large increase in voter turnout, and far less disenfranchisement in the electorate.

    What happens to policies themselves after such a change is not nearly as predictable as those things are.
    Yes, I get your point that you think we would be better represented by a multi-party system, but I am trying to understand in what ways you feel that our government is not representing the will of the people. What do you expect to change, policy wise, with multi-party representation?



    And how will you make it so that whatever reforms are put in place don't allow bipartisan attempts to crowd out third parties from winning elections if they do manage to have a successful grassroots effort to gain local support?

    Such bipartisan gerrymandering is relatively common today.
    it would have to be changed through the political process, the same way a multi-party system would have to be adopted. There is a bill in Congress to address redistricting that would limit changes to every 10 years and it would have to be based on the census.
    Last edited by Catawba; 01-17-12 at 07:34 PM.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  5. #165
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Do you vote? (poll)

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    They voted in opposition to what their party leaders wanted.
    That's a different thing than voting against the party line.




    Previously, you listed two ways that multi-party representation had come about. One was through violence and the other was to adopt the system through our political process.
    And I also stated previously that civil war was not an option in the US because the issue is not one that people feel is worth dying for.

    Since your comment was specifically about the differences between the US's system and the system I am discussing, you should have the integrity to note that I had said that. Civil war is the way that such a system comes about when the current status quo of that nation is far worse than our status quo so that a person does feel that killing and dying for a change is a better alternative than the status quo.

    That is not the case in the US.





    Yes, I get your point that you think we would be better represented by a multi-party system, but I am trying to understand in what ways you feel that our government is not representing the will of the people.

    The problem here is that you are equivocating on the word "represent", which is a fallacious and possibly dishonest (if it is being done on purpose) approach to the discussion.

    A tyrannical dictatorship can represent the will of the people, but that doesn't make it a representative form of government. The first step towards understanding my position would be to stop engaging in such fallacious rebuttals. I can't force you to do this, but until you do, understanding cannot be achieved.

    What do you expect to change, policy wise, with multi-party representation?
    The policy decisions are a secondary consideration to the representation issue and they are totally unpredictable. Policies could change dramatically or not at all. It's totally unpredictable.

    What would definitely change, though, is that a great many people who aren't represented in our government would have a voice in that government which is utterly unattainable in the current system, and this inability to have a voice in government directly leads to voter apathy and disenfranchisement.

    You seem to want to make my position about policy alone when it is about representation. Why are you doing that and ignoring my actual positions?



    it would have to be changed through the political process, the same way a multi-party system would have to be adopted. There is a bill in Congress to address redistricting that would limit changes to every 10 years and it would have to be based on the census.
    That's how you would try to get it passed, but that doesn't even come remotely close to answering the question that I actually asked.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  6. #166
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Do you vote? (poll)

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    The problem here is that you are equivocating on the word "represent"


    You seem to want to make my position about policy alone when it is about representation.


    Well, looks like that ends our discussion.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  7. #167
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Do you vote? (poll)

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Well, looks like that ends our discussion.
    Why? Are you not able to glean the specific definition of "representation" I am using in this context?

    Your definition shifts from one use of the word to the other (which is why it is equivocation). Mine is remaining consistent (which is why it is not equivocation).
    Last edited by Tucker Case; 01-18-12 at 03:31 PM.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  8. #168
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Do you vote? (poll)

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Why? Are you not able to glean the specific definition of "representation" I am using in this context?

    Your definition shifts from one use of the word to the other (which is why it is equivocation). Mine is remaining consistent (which is why it is not equivocation).
    Best of luck to you in your quest!
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  9. #169
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Do you vote? (poll)

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Best of luck to you in your quest!
    What quest is that?
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  10. #170
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Do you vote? (poll)

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    What quest is that?
    Whatever you wish it to be!
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

Page 17 of 18 FirstFirst ... 715161718 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •