• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you vote? (poll)

Do you vote?

  • Yes: in all elections (national and local)

    Votes: 55 64.0%
  • Yes: but only in national and some local

    Votes: 14 16.3%
  • Yes: but only national

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • Maybe: it depends on the election

    Votes: 6 7.0%
  • No: I'm not old enough, yet.

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • No: not at all

    Votes: 3 3.5%
  • No: I'm not legally permitted

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • Other

    Votes: 5 5.8%

  • Total voters
    86
Politics is a game I only play when I have something to win. I vote when I care about the outcome, and I see absolutely no obligation to vote when I don't care.

Then you never have any right to complain about anything the government does because you refuse to play a part in the outcome.
 
Popular vote chooses who your state's electoral votes go to. (Almost always)

If popular vote decides who wins then why did Gore lose to Bush?
 
Then you never have any right to complain about anything the government does because you refuse to play a part in the outcome.
Of course you can. If both candidates are disasters, and you have no options then what can you do. If I am going to vote between Hitler and Stalin, then I wouldn't vote. And yes, I would complain afterwards, if I could.

I sometimes vote, really depends if I care or not. I voted in the first two elections, in the next one it was local elections for my home city on the other side of the globe. I really didn't care about the outcome.
 
Then you never have any right to complain about anything the government does because you refuse to play a part in the outcome.
I generally disregard the political opinions of people who don't vote (at all). Unfortunately, my mother is like this. She complains, but refuses to vote. So, I politely listen (she is my mother after all), but rarely engage her in political conversation because, well... I just don't care what she has to say politically.


If popular vote decides who wins then why did Gore lose to Bush?
Read my post again. You completely missed the point. Your popular vote in YOUR STATE decides which candidate YOUR STATE'S electoral college representatives will vote for.

How the states then add up is another matter, but your popular vote still isn't completely negated.
 
Last edited:
Read my post again. You completely missed the point. Your popular vote in YOUR STATE decides which candidate YOUR STATE'S electoral college representatives will vote for.

How the states then add up is another matter, but your popular vote still isn't completely negated.

Read my original post again. My point was that the voters don't always have the ultimate say, that is the "other matter". And besides that Nationwide statistics reveal that an estimated 2% of ballots cast do not even register a vote for President. I'll choose when there's a candidate worthy of my vote but I refuse to pick someone only because I dislike them less. My choice to not vote is as important a statement as a citizen if not more than someone who chooses a candidate no matter what claiming that's the only way to be involved.
 
I only vote in local elections where my vote can actually count. National elections are a joke.
 
Yes, in all elections, it is my duty as a citizen.
 
Curiosity kills - do you vote?

Do you care to explain why or why not?

You didn't have my option so didn't vote.

I will vote when I can vote for someone that isn't "the lesser of two evils". Until I come across a politician like that then I don't vote.
 
Yes, in all elections, it is my duty as a citizen.

(this isn't directed at you personally Catawba)

I always find this type of comment to be silly. IMO voting for the sake of voting because it is "my duty as a citizen" has led to the mentality of "gotta vote for the lesser of two evils". Sometimes saying nothing is just as effective or more effective than saying something. One example of this is the Presidents ability to use "pocket veto". Granted I'm not the President and my lack of voting is far more less effective than those that do vote. But at least for me it does what I want it to do. Which is make a statement about <insert all the crappy politicians here> not being worthy enough to be in office.

Edit: Just to note, if they had an option to vote negatively against someone without voting for someone else then I would be voting every chance I got. Since there isn't one then I have to make do with my only other recourse.
 
Last edited:
Why bother? By the time Californians are still voting, New Pres is already announced.
 
I have not missed an opportunity to vote in any local state or national election in decades.
 
Edit: Just to note, if they had an option to vote negatively against someone without voting for someone else then I would be voting every chance I got. Since there isn't one then I have to make do with my only other recourse.

So as to avoid the possibility of derailing this thread I have made a thread about this Here I feel that this is worth discussing.
 
(this isn't directed at you personally Catawba)

I always find this type of comment to be silly. IMO voting for the sake of voting because it is "my duty as a citizen" has led to the mentality of "gotta vote for the lesser of two evils". Sometimes saying nothing is just as effective or more effective than saying something. One example of this is the Presidents ability to use "pocket veto". Granted I'm not the President and my lack of voting is far more less effective than those that do vote. But at least for me it does what I want it to do. Which is make a statement about <insert all the crappy politicians here> not being worthy enough to be in office.

Edit: Just to note, if they had an option to vote negatively against someone without voting for someone else then I would be voting every chance I got. Since there isn't one then I have to make do with my only other recourse.

Since there is no perfect candidate (or human for that matter), it is always going to come down to voting for the lesser evil, isn't it?
 
Last edited:
If you are old enough to vote and do not? Well get the hell outta here and also stop crying all over the real world and internet. In other words: dont' vote? Why in the hell are you trying to debate politics. Sure:you got a right to not vote and I got the right to tell you to shut the hell up.
 
I've not missed voting in any election since I was 18. Voting is not just a privilege, it is a duty. Democracy requires participation to succeed. The only time I refused to check a name on the ballot was 2008, for the office of president. None were either qualified or worthy, so I wrote in someone who was.

This is so very true and we need to make sure we keep voting alive. How much you wanna bet all those that do not vote if the right was taking away would be very pissed off.

People DIED for our rights to vote and to not vote and then being all mad with no change is made? Well you are in part to blame if you do not vote.
 
Since there is no perfect candidate (or human for that matter), it is always going to come down to voting for the lesser evil, isn't it?

Lets put it this way. I would rather vote for someone who was honest and honorable that doesn't hold any of my views than vote for someone who was dishonest and dishonorable that holds all of my views.

I know that no politician will ever be perfect. That is way too much to ask for. But I don't think that it is too much to ask for a politician that is reasonably perfect. To me a "reasonably perfect" candidate would be someone who is honest, honorable, doesn't flip flop and will stick to his/her guns unless shown that they are in the wrong...and most important of all...one that will listen to The People and not The Money....is that really too much to ask for in someone who is suppose to represent the People?
 
If you are old enough to vote and do not? Well get the hell outta here and also stop crying all over the real world and internet. In other words: dont' vote? Why in the hell are you trying to debate politics. Sure:you got a right to not vote and I got the right to tell you to shut the hell up.

This is so very true and we need to make sure we keep voting alive. How much you wanna bet all those that do not vote if the right was taking away would be very pissed off.

People DIED for our rights to vote and to not vote and then being all mad with no change is made? Well you are in part to blame if you do not vote.

And you are even more to blame if you did vote for the person that contributed to our country to having all the problems we currently have. And voting for the loser of an election so no change is made also is the same as not voting at all. And there is something else that our soldiers fought and DIED for besides the right to vote and its even more important...the right to choose.

So, get off your high horse and use that brain of yours to actually think about what other people are saying.
 
Financial activity of 2008 presidential candidates and national party convention committees increased 80% in receipts over the 2004 presidential election, totaling more than $1.8 billion. Between PACs, 527s and "soft money" from corporations, unions and wealthy donors and their funds for political advertising they spent more than $400 million in the 2008 federal elections. It sounds like money and organized groups are more responsible for electing our officials.

I wonder out of the 131 million people or 64% voter turnout reported in the 2008 U.S. presidential elections how many are actually satisfied with their choice? We have a two party system that has adopted extremist, ideological views on the issues, which have polarized and separated the people. The majority of them whose main goal is to achieve and maintain a seat of power, so they can mismanage our taxpayer dollars and blame us for the debt. They're individuals whose alliance is based on their own self interests and group sponsors, not the citizens they're suppose to represent. But it's insisted we vote and agree with this bung-holed system? It's my duty as a citizen to abstain, object and speak up for change. Get the excess funds and special interests influence out of politics first, then let's see if anyone appears worth voting for. Not somebody who is a Pollyanna socialist or a war monger that wants to play "whack-a-mole" with every person of interest.
 
And you are even more to blame if you did vote for the person that contributed to our country to having all the problems we currently have. And voting for the loser of an election so no change is made also is the same as not voting at all. And there is something else that our soldiers fought and DIED for besides the right to vote and its even more important...the right to choose.

So, get off your high horse and use that brain of yours to actually think about what other people are saying.

I do not think so! I vote for who I think will do the best job and gives a crap about the issues that are important to me and just because they may lose it is MY fault? The hell it is! You best check yourself and use your brain before posting crap like this bud.
 
I do not think so! I vote for who I think will do the best job and gives a crap about the issues that are important to me and just because they may lose it is MY fault? The hell it is! You best check yourself and use your brain before posting crap like this bud.

1: The best job at corruption?
2: The only "issues" that politicians now adays care about is what either is in their pockets or what can be put into their pockets.
3: Yes it is your fault. Remember, its your duty to vote right? That comes with the responsibility to choose the correct person and if you chose the loser then that is your fault for not picking the winner.
4: Next time you feel like degrading those that don't vote check your own self before posting that crap "bud".
5: Notice you didn't actually try to dispute anything else that I said. Wise move.
 
And you are even more to blame if you did vote for the person that contributed to our country to having all the problems we currently have. And voting for the loser of an election so no change is made also is the same as not voting at all. And there is something else that our soldiers fought and DIED for besides the right to vote and its even more important...the right to choose.

So, get off your high horse and use that brain of yours to actually think about what other people are saying.

Minus the emotive content, there wouldn't be enough left to post a single sentence.
 
Lets put it this way. I would rather vote for someone who was honest and honorable that doesn't hold any of my views than vote for someone who was dishonest and dishonorable that holds all of my views.

I know that no politician will ever be perfect. That is way too much to ask for. But I don't think that it is too much to ask for a politician that is reasonably perfect. To me a "reasonably perfect" candidate would be someone who is honest, honorable, doesn't flip flop and will stick to his/her guns unless shown that they are in the wrong...and most important of all...one that will listen to The People and not The Money....is that really too much to ask for in someone who is suppose to represent the People?

Which of the presidential candidates do you consider to be honest and honorable?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom