wednes | Wednes Writes, about the Right to vote.

Current Music: quiet, I should be sleeping

Entry tags:

Wednes Writes, about the Right to vote.

Let me begin by saying that the election results are great. I'm excited for a minimum wage increase, although it's not gonna do me much good until I actually find a job. Because all wages will go up in the process--maybe not as much as they should, but they'll go up.

What I want to mention though, is the vitriol I'm hearing toward people who choose not to vote. It was all over the TV (even Mtv), all over my flist, and the internets in general. Apparently you suck, you should be ashamed of yourself, and you have no right to be dissatisfied with the current regime if you did not vote.
I don't mind telling you that I think all that is bullshit.
And as I was just saying yesterday, that attitude further divides and polarizes us as Americans.

1. People who are not informed on the issues should not vote. In fact, they are largely responsible for fucking things up. And by "informed" I don't mean that you've seen all the ads. I mean informed by non-partisan information, or at least all the varied partisan info you can find.

2. A right is not the same as an obligation. Voting is a personal choice, like having an abortion or coming out. The real trouble begins when we start telling others that they need to do what we do, because we're totally right and they're totally wrong. People, why do I even need to explain this? And yeah, it's probably true that plenty of people are too apathetic, frustrated, or plain lazy to vote. And you know what? That's none of anyone else's business. Just do your thing and stay out of my beeswax!

3. I did happen to vote, since the Dick DeVos people were giving out rides to the old and/or lazy...and me. FYI, I did not, nor would I ever have, voted for Dick DeVos. In fact, here's a not-so loving good bye to DeVos, Rick Santorum (I shall miss mocking you, sir), Donald "Rummy" Rumsfeld, and the scores of other fascists I'm forgetting. *waves with cupped hand like in the parade*

4. We should try not to hate people who disagree. I have as much trouble trying to reasonably disagree as many of you, but that really should be our goal. I oppose affirmative action, and I've found very few people who can respectfully disagree with me. I've been called every kind of rascist, conservative, bigot in the world. But you know what? Bill Clinton doesn't support it either, and he's awesome. Bush supporters make me mad and frustrated as hell, but hating them just takes up too much of my day, seriously.

5. I find it difficult to argue the point that voting is just a game straight, white, christian, land owning males play with eachother in order to fool the proles (that's us) into thinking we have some input on this shit. Why aren't we voting on where to spend taxes where it counts? Why don't we have legal pot and national healthcare? Because no one gives a damn what the average citizen needs or wants. We stood by helplessly while a man most of us didn't vote for destroyed our woldwide credibility, ignored americans during life threatening crises, and feigned ignorance before the world about what is and is not torture. There was nothing we could do about it, because we have no power. And that's with me voting every time...
So I can see where people are coming from when they make their choice not to vote.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Of course, that is assuming that they are allowed to vote, and not turned away for spurious reasons. It is also assuming the Diebold machines are not rigged, and that every vote is counted.

I have no faith in any of those things; and I don't guess I'm alone in that.

I know you love to be argumentative, so I'll ask: do you honestly beleive that the way to make lasting change is to "get out there and vote"? And that the reason such change has not been affected yet is that not enough people vote?

Yes I do think that we could make a lasting change through voting. And that the reason the country is run this way is not only because not enough people vote, but also because people vote out of ignorance. In democracy the people get the government they deserve.

Wow...

I had no idea you didn't know the last two prez elections were stolen. I thought that was accepted as common knowlege.

I would appreciate it if you would not make assumptions about what I do and don't know. When you want to actually discuss this let me know.

I would appreciate it if you would not make assumptions about what I do and don't know.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here.
We've discussed it. I could have sworn we were in agreement that the last 2 elections were stolen.

And if indeed, that is the case, than voting is most certainly NOT the answer.

When you want to actually discuss this let me know.

I didn't. I posted my opinion in my journal and you popped by to say I was wrong. You then validated my point, and then said I was wrong again. Then presented an argument which further validated my point, then copped that wierd attitude thing you do where you pretend everyone is oppressing you.

Feel oppressed?
Well, get out there and vote!

If you are so certain that we are in agreement that the last 2 elections were stolen then why would you write "I had no idea you didn't know the last two prez elections were stolen." which obviously intended to imply that I didn't know the last two elections were stolen. But if your attempt is to refute my belief that voting works by pointing out fraudulent elections then you are mistaken. Has it ever occurred to you that voting could work despite election fraud? Election fraud has been happening ever since the first election and will be around as long as elections. Surely you don't question the validity of every election?

Besides, I agree that the '00 election was definitely stolen, but only that the '04 election was possibly stolen.

I assumed that because you were discussing this issue that you wanted to discuss it. But then you made a statement that was neither in support of your opinion, nor in descent of mine. It confused me as to your purpose so I asked for you to let me know when you wanted to discuss the issue again.

why would you write "I had no idea you didn't know the last two prez elections were stolen."

I assumed I was mistaken. I have this capacity to reexamine my behavior in the face of evidence to the contrary. You might try it some time.

I assumed that because you were discussing this issue that you wanted to discuss it.

To my mind, I was repsonding to yet another of your "I agree with what you said, but here's why you're wrong..." statements.

And no, I don't think voting is the answer despite election fraud. Just like banking wouldn't work if bank fraud was more common. It makes me very angry to think that anyone would blame the voters for things they have no control over; then turn around and say election fraud doesn't affect things that much. It's absurd.

As for your community organization idea--I've been a part of several GRPO's in my life. If you have been, it's news to me. Between ACORN and PIRGiM, the league of women voters and several Get Out the Vote campaigns, I can tell you that it isn't nearly enough to make any lasting governmental change. Hell, people have been working on Detroit for 20 years and it's still a cesspool in places.

The next time you are confused as to where I stand on an issue you should ask me. That way we can avoid tedious misunderstandings made through assumptions.

So you weren't discussing this issue, you were repeatedly responding to my comments regarding the issue. My bad.

I don't blame voters for things that they have no control over, nor have I. I blame non-voters for what they do have control over. And I never said that election fraud doesn't affect things much. I said that voting can and does work despite election fraud. If you are waiting around for an election that isn't tainted even the slightest by fraud then you will be waiting a long time. Probably forever.

The next time you are confused as to where I stand on an issue you should ask me. That way we can avoid tedious misunderstandings made through assumptions.

How about this, how about you send out memo's so we can all be aware when you change your mind on topics from week to week. I cant' tell you how many irate government related phone messages I've gotten from you in the past. Never once did you mention that this was caused by a lack of voting. No...it was all about Bush being an ass, being stupid, being a liar, etc.

Maybe you'd like to deny ever saying you were pro-life as well?

And yes, as I have already stated numerous times, I find your bullying behavior intolerable--which means I don't tolerate it. This is why I respond each and every time, I can't stand to let bullies get away with their bullying bullshit.

I simply don't see how voting "can and does" work in the face of rampant fraud? Did you hear that on NPR or something?

I would appreciate it if you could stick to the topic at hand and not make inflammatory statements.

I have never in my life supported a law banning abortion. I have, on occasion, tried to explain to people that the pro-life argument for such a law is not totally irrational.

My behavior has not been bullying.

I never said that voting works in the face of rampant fraud. If you must quote me then please do it in context. I said that it can and does work despite fraud. If election fraud can't be overcome by an educated conscientious electorate then voting has always been and will always be a sham.

Here's you telling me how rude I am for saying that if you think people who have abortions are murderers, that you are pro-life.

http://nate101000.livejournal.com/38711.html

I am unclear on what statements you consider inflammatory, nor do I understand how you would define your behavior, if not bullying.

If election fraud can't be overcome by an educated conscientious electorate then voting has always been and will always be a sham.

Well, yes. That's what I've been saying all along.
It's a fucking sham.

And if the electoral fraud we've experienced is not rampant, I cannot imagine what you would consider rampant to be. More than 5K dead people voted in Detroit's last mayoral election, while hundreds more were turned away from the polls. And that's just one election in a city most people don't even care about.

Please read the post again. No where in that post, in the comments, or in the live conversation that inspired the post did I say that I am pro-life. Nor did I say that I think people who have abortions are murderers. What I said was...

"I have this capacity to reexamine my behavior in the face of evidence to the contrary. You might try it some time."
"How about this, how about you send out memo's so we can all be aware when you change your mind on topics from week to week."
Not only do these statements have nothing to do with the discussion at hand, they can only serve to antagonize me.

I have been respectfully disagreeing with you. Exactly what have I done that is bullying?

So all voting everywhere is a sham? I don't see that the evidence supporting that. Some elections have been shams, that doesn't invalidate all of them.

I'm not saying that the last Detroit election wasn't rampant fraud, it was. And so was the 2000 presidential election.

The desparity seems to be: if the elections are frauds, then voting doesn't help the populus, they are powerless.

I don't understand how voting can be both a fraudulent sham and still be the key to change. IMHO they are mutually exclusive.

Since not all elections are fraudulent then voting is not always a sham, only sometimes. Also, if the public showed up and voted for one candidate overwhelmingly then no amount of fraud could change the outcome.

I think that's true. But it assumes that most people will agree on one candidate. Even if you think Bush is a bad man and an incompetant leader, it would have been difficult to predict a lot of those outcomes. I mean, he is a spectacularly, astoundingly shitty president, when I thought he would be merely shitty.

Still, it's a gross oversimplification to say that people who don't vote are responsible for the horrors that go on in contemporary government. In fact, calling the non-voters more culpable that the actual perpetrators lets an awful lot of very bad men off the hook for their deeds.

I was both shocked and appalled by the '04 presidential election and also the last Detroit mayoral election. I was confident that the voting public would signify their displeasure by voting them out. As it was the Detroit election was so close that voter fraud almost certainly put it over to Kilpatrick, and the '04 was a wide enough margin that it might even have been legit. Maybe the idiot voters are more the problem than non-voters. Maybe we need a don't vote unless you're informed campaign instead of just encouraging people to vote just because they are supposed to. But I still say people who don't vote shouldn't complain.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Wednes Writes, about the Right to vote.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject