[USA, Politics] Can I Vote?


Off-Topic Discussions

1 to 50 of 92 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Apologies in advance for MOAR POLITIX! thread...

If you are eligible to vote in the U.S., please take a moment very soon to go here: Can I Vote?. Please verify that you are still eligible and your information is correct. I don't care if you are a Dem or Repub, Conservative or Progressive/Liberal, or somewhere else on the spectrum: Your voice is important; make sure it will be heard this election.

And then remember, of course, in November to get out and vote. :)


Indeed!


Voting is for ninnies!

Vive le Galt!


In Australia if you are registered to vote (over 18 not in prison or have medical or religious reasons not to vote) its a $50 fine if you don't turn up to vote - it doesn't matter what you do on the ballot paper as long as you show up. Voting is your democratic duty how you vote is your business (left right green donkey whatever) participation is part of the responsibilities that come with democracy. Failing to vote is failing your fellow citizens.

As my father says if you don't participate you have no right to complain.


Don't assume that just because you were registered in the last election cycle that you still are. There have been attempts to purge the rolls of those ineligible and often eligible voters are dropped as well.

And especially, make sure you have the ID required. In many swing states that's changing. It may not be the same as last time.


Don't assume that you need an ID to vote.

Vote early, vote often!


You think they'll throw a fit over the fact that my license is presented with an apostrophe in my last name, and their version on file does not?


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Voting is for ninnies!

Vive le Galt!

Believing it makes a difference is for ninnies.

It does make the whole thing infinitesimally harder to rig. But... garbage in, garbage out.

I'll still be pulling that lever, despite your communist agitation.


I've never even been registered to vote!

Vive le Communist Agitation!

Silver Crusade

Maybe the Comrade Anklebiter ballot is the one that will get the Socialist Workers Party candidate into the White House!

Or probably not...


The 8th Dwarf wrote:

In Australia if you are registered to vote (over 18 not in prison or have medical or religious reasons not to vote) its a $50 fine if you don't turn up to vote - it doesn't matter what you do on the ballot paper as long as you show up. Voting is your democratic duty how you vote is your business (left right green donkey whatever) participation is part of the responsibilities that come with democracy. Failing to vote is failing your fellow citizens.

As my father says if you don't participate you have no right to complain.

You said DOODY!!!! hahahahahahaha

(half orcses r easily amused)

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Make sure to vote if you're eligible, if only to spite Anklebiter.

And if he replies to this, it only bumps the thread to help remind people.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I know I'm still eligible, because they still mail the ballots to my house.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Voting is for ninnies!

Vive le Galt!

You're just cranky you got audited. I told you that you needed to use form 1040 and list your deductions to write off the guillotines and Molotov cocktails as business expenses.

Also, you can't deduct those Molotov cocktails as an expense.


Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:

Also, you can't deduct those Molotov cocktails as an expense.

This is bullshiznit!

Vive le Galt!

Liberty's Edge

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

I've never even been registered to vote!

Vive le Communist Agitation!

What happened to the plan to vote for Citizen Kirth?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Vive le Galt!

coming soon...

VIVA LE GALT!

starring:

Elvis Anklebiter as Lucky Doodlebug!
Gruumash von Ratfink as Count Elmo Humperdink!
and introducing
Pillbug Toenibbler as Rusty Ann-Margret!

copyright 2012 Do It In The Streets, Ltd.
Executive Producers: Gark T. Goblin and "Mama" Kelsey MacAilbert
Directed by Aslaadi Smithee.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wow. That may be my favorite post ever.

Link


Celestial Healer wrote:

Maybe the Comrade Anklebiter ballot is the one that will get the Socialist Workers Party candidate into the White House!

Or probably not...

You're back in NYC, right? You ever see the huge mural they've got on their bookstore (or, at least, had, I haven't been in a while)?

Too bad they're revisionist stooges of the plutocracy...

Silver Crusade

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Celestial Healer wrote:

Maybe the Comrade Anklebiter ballot is the one that will get the Socialist Workers Party candidate into the White House!

Or probably not...

You're back in NYC, right? You ever see the huge mural they've got on their bookstore (or, at least, had, I haven't been in a while)?

Too bad they're revisionist stooges of the plutocracy...

I haven't seen it. I'll keep my eyes open, though.


Hmmm, I'm not sure if this is the same location or not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
...Your voice is important; make sure it will be heard this election.

Except that your voice, and your vote REALLY don't matter.

Al Gore got 100's of thousands more votes then Bush in 2000. Did he win? No. Was that the first time that happened? No.

I can get 100,000 of my friends here in NY to vote one way or the other... will it have the slightest affect? No. NY's votes are going to the democrat. They always do.

If you really want to get one candidate elected over another, work to get a law passed that will get one demographic or another kicked off the voter roles or form a pro-business super-pac. That is what wins elections. Voting just gives legitimacy to a total scam of a system, and fools people into thinking they have a choice. You don't. Goldman -Sachs and many other corporations give money to BOTH candidates. Your "choices" are bought and sold by people who don't have your best interests in mind.

Carlin said it far better then I could
EDIT: "A 2001 Gallup article noted that "a majority of Americans have continually expressed support for the notion of an official amendment of the U.S. Constitution that would allow for direct election of the president" since one of the first-ever public polls on the matter in 1944, and Gallup found no significant change in 2004."
So, people have been against the system for over 60 years, yet for some reason the politicians who benefit from it don't want to change it... Yay "Democracy"!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fergie wrote:
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
...Your voice is important; make sure it will be heard this election.

Except that your voice, and your vote REALLY don't matter.

Al Gore got 100's of thousands more votes then Bush in 2000. Did he win? No. Was that the first time that happened? No.

I can get 100,000 of my friends here in NY to vote one way or the other... will it have the slightest affect? No. NY's votes are going to the democrat. They always do.

If you really want to get one candidate elected over another, work to get a law passed that will get one demographic or another kicked off the voter roles or form a pro-business super-pac. That is what wins elections. Voting just gives legitimacy to a total scam of a system, and fools people into thinking they have a choice. You don't. Goldman -Sachs and many other corporations give money to BOTH candidates. Your "choices" are bought and sold by people who don't have your best interests in mind.

Carlin said it far better then I could
EDIT: "A 2001 Gallup article noted that "a majority of Americans have continually expressed support for the notion of an official amendment of the U.S. Constitution that would allow for direct election of the president" since one of the first-ever public polls on the matter in 1944, and Gallup found no significant change in 2004."
So, people have been against the system for over 60 years, yet for some reason the politicians who benefit from it don't want to change it... Yay "Democracy"!

Your vote for President may not count, but votes for Congresscritters and state/local officials do. Go Vote!


thejeff wrote:
Fergie wrote:
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
...Your voice is important; make sure it will be heard this election.
Except that your voice, and your vote REALLY don't matter. <much snipped>
Your vote for President may not count, but votes for Congresscritters and state/local officials do. Go Vote!

And state amendments/laws, local schools and zoning changes, millage rates, and in some states, judges too (even state supremes, like in Michigan).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Fergie wrote:
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
...Your voice is important; make sure it will be heard this election.
Except that your voice, and your vote REALLY don't matter. <much snipped>
Your vote for President may not count, but votes for Congresscritters and state/local officials do. Go Vote!
And state amendments/laws, local schools and zoning changes, millage rates, and in some states, judges too (even state supremes, like in Michigan).

And in places like Colorado, efforts to legalize (and regulate) marijuana. Vive le bubble bubble!

The Exchange

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

In Australia if you are registered to vote (over 18 not in prison or have medical or religious reasons not to vote) its a $50 fine if you don't turn up to vote - it doesn't matter what you do on the ballot paper as long as you show up. Voting is your democratic duty how you vote is your business (left right green donkey whatever) participation is part of the responsibilities that come with democracy. Failing to vote is failing your fellow citizens.

As my father says if you don't participate you have no right to complain.

Representative Democracy a violation of my right to represent myself.


The Democratic party was formed in 1830. The Republican party was formed in 1854. Both are examples of the creation of new, viable parties. So, yes, it is possible for a new party to come along and become dominant.

But we get the government we deserve. The only reason we have jokers in Washington is because people keep electing them.

And what makes things worse is -why- they keep electing them

"If I don't vote for the lesser evil, then the greater evil will win!" How about -not- voting for evil?

"Oh, you don't like my candidate? Well, the other candidate is worse!" There are several different candidates. If the only defense for Obama is that Romney is worse and if the only defense of Romney is that Obama is worse, then its time to exercise your vote and bring in someone else.

My country is a nation of idiots.


Well, you're not alone.


There are many different candidates but the only two who have the slightest chance of winning or of having any effect on the country are Obama and Romney. If you're not going to vote for one of them you might as well stay home or vote for one of the really wacky write in candidates.

And vote in the primaries. Try to get decent local candidates. Focusing only on the top of the ticket is useless. That's not where you can make change happen. If you're a Libertarian, find Libertarians who are actually willing to do the hard work of running for local offices and actually capable of winning and doing the job. Forget the top ticket ego runs, their just publicity campaigns.

And I'm certainly no closer to Gary Johnson than to Obama. I'd be happy with his civil liberties and some of his foreign policy stances, but his economic/domestic agenda would be disastrous.


There are a lot of reasons to vote for a third party. Here are some

1.) Help get them into the debates.
2.) Force one of the two major parties to make concessions to gain your party's support
3.) Stop the sense of entitlement career politicians have
4.) Help to get rid of the "my guy is better than the other guy" idiocy that is pervasive in political debate

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

I hope everyone votes -- I wish I could link to it, but I don't have a copy, but it's an image of a massive crowd of people saying, "But what can one person do?" All of us together can speak up. And if you aren't happy with either major candidate, absolutely vote for another party or write in someone--showing up and voting shows you care and aren't just some apathetic idiot, and that you are worth counting so that next time the candidates will bear in mind the numbers that were unhappy with them--they never like losing votes to anyone (and it's especially embarrassing if they lose votes to Bugs Bunny or someone) so it sends a message. If you don't show up, it just shows the politicians that you don't care what they do and that it doesn't matter what they do because you won't speak up about it anyway. And especially since this bipartisan crap is itself becoming America's worst enemy (in my opinion) showing that people are starting to think about third parties might actually get the ball rolling on reconfiguring how things work. In a very long time, sure... but I don't know, I know I'm babbling, but I just can't fathom never speaking when you're given the opportunity to do so. I'm proud of living in a democratic country and feel ashamed when our citizens don't participate, like they don't care what their ancestors came here for, and maybe fought and died for. Just my sleepy and judgy idealistic thoughts.

And yeah, I know I'm registered because I renewed my driver's license not long ago and they always check your registration at the same time.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

I removed an argument. Another thread, please.


I reregistered after I changed addresses. I know it went through because I've already gotten pollsters at the door calling me by name.

I love dogs. Especially the friendly ones that you need to grab before they lunge at people demanding pets.


Fergie wrote:
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
...Your voice is important; make sure it will be heard this election.
Except that your voice, and your vote REALLY don't matter.

Yes, they do.

First, your vote for more local candidates does matter. Fewer people vote in local contests, and they are decided via popular vote.

Second, your vote contributes to popular vote, which is widely reported. If a President is elected with 50% or more of the popular vote, it is played as a "mandate" from the American people and can have a real effect on the candidate's first push in office.

Don't you DARE trot out or repeat half-baked excuses for voter apathy. You have two choices: vote, or don't vote. But don't blame the system when you choose the latter. If you choose not to vote, you have also chosen to be a non-participant in any political discussions until the next election season. I realize this may come across as harsh, but it needs to be. Do not encourage voter apathy by spreading half-truths.

Quote:

EDIT: "A 2001 Gallup article noted that "a majority of Americans have continually expressed support for the notion of an official amendment of the U.S. Constitution that would allow for direct election of the president" since one of the first-ever public polls on the matter in 1944, and Gallup found no significant change in 2004."

So, people have been against the system for over 60 years, yet for some reason the politicians who benefit from it don't want to change it... Yay "Democracy"!

Okay, this needs some explanation. Amending the U.S. Constitution requires ratification by three-quarters of the states in the union. The electoral college system very heavily favors states with small and medium populations, especially those that don't vote reliably one way or the other. States with large populations do not benefit from the electoral college system; they would be better off with a popular vote system. This is because each state effectively runs its own election. If you vote in California, your vote has no impact on the results that come out of Ohio. Only once each individual state's votes are tallied are they then scored out and combined with all the other states. Ohio may have fewer electoral votes than California, but that doesn't matter at all when it comes to the attention of politicians. Here's why.

California has a huge population. Tremendous. Very, very large. It also has 55 electoral votes; more than any other state. But no presidential candidate will tour California during campaign season. There just isn't any point. Sure, they'll stop off for a couple days maybe to privately fundraise, but there won't be any serious campaigning. California will vote for the Democratic candidate. Its population is understood to be liberal enough that there is effectively no chance that it will vote for a Republican candidate for President. It would take a huge amount of effort on any candidate's part, with a lot of luck and inherent appeal, to be able to "swing" California. It's not worth it.

Meanwhile, Ohio has 20 electoral votes, and a much smaller population. Ohio gets tons of attention during campaign season, because its voters are much less reliable in terms of who they will support. Ohio is typically a swing state - it can swing either direction depending on the dynamics of the particular election season. This means that it's very worthwhile for a candidate to campaign in Ohio. If he can persuade even a relatively small number of Ohioans to vote for him, he stands a good chance of picking up those 20 electoral votes. And remember, it's winner take all. If he wins Ohio, he gets all of its electoral votes.

What does this mean? It means that states like Ohio get a lot of attention from the future President (or the sitting President, in the case of non-term-limited Presidents), while states like California get very little attention. And getting attention from the future President is a really great thing. It means the future President will familiarize himself with your state's issues. It means he will outline plans for improving your life, as a swing state resident, because it's your vote he's trying to win. In other words, it's freaking awesome to be an undecided voter in a swing state, because you're the one with all the power and everyone wants to be your friend.

Now, to get back to the issue of amending the Constitution. It takes three-quarters of all the states in the Union to ratify an amendment. That means 38 out of the 50 states must support any proposed amendment for it to be passed into law. If you're a swing state, amending the Constitution to change Presidential elections to a popular vote is shooting yourself in the foot. Instead of getting all the attention, you'll get none. Your vote will no longer be important. Instead, candidate's will do what any smart person would do: campaign in population centers. You still want to win undecided voters, but you no longer have to win them in polarized states. You can campaign anywhere you want, because suddenly everyone's vote is equally important. In other words, no swing state - and precious few other states - will ever give their approval to such a proposed amendment.

This has nothing to do with the "politicians who benefit". It has everything to do with the voters in swing states wanting to keep their VIP access to future Presidents. It's as simple as this: the founding fathers essentially ensured that Presidential elections would never be a popular vote, whether intentionally or unintentionally.


Here in Chile, you are automatically registered in the system upon birth, and voting itself is voluntary. This was implemented last year; previous to that, inscription was voluntary and voting -once inscribed- mandatory, with a fine of about 140 USD if you didn't show up (and had no excuses, such as being more than 400 kilometres away from your voting location). Participation usually sits at 90%, and the voting system itself is expedite and completely clean. Even if most politicians are rather unpopular these days (growing pains, I think), one thing no one puts in question here is the purity of the vote.

As for the voting itself, it's one man, one vote. No intermediaries or delegates.

I've always considered voting a fundamentally republican duty (as in "of the republic", not Republican party) and one that every member of society should undertake. Not voting because you think it doesn't make a difference is, to me, like justifying throwing garbage on the street because a single person won't pollute that much.

Caring about politics, which is not the same as liking politics, is to me a sign of maturity.

So go vote, ya lollygagging skunkswallows, even if it is for Batman or Optimus Prime. Care about what's going on up there, because ultimately you'll have to live with it whether you like it or not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just for the record, there's a simpler way to shift from the electoral college to a popular vote system.
The proposal is for states to agree to allocate their votes to the winner of the popular vote, if states controlling a majority of the electoral votes do so. A number of states have already signed on.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:


Okay, this needs some explanation. Amending the U.S. Constitution requires ratification by three-quarters of the states in the union. The electoral college system very heavily favors states with small and medium populations, especially those that don't vote reliably one way or the other.

Although if enough states pass the National Popular Vote Compact we can legally make the electoral college simply a formality that confirms the results of the popular election.


deinol wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:


Okay, this needs some explanation. Amending the U.S. Constitution requires ratification by three-quarters of the states in the union. The electoral college system very heavily favors states with small and medium populations, especially those that don't vote reliably one way or the other.
Although if enough states pass the National Popular Vote Compact we can legally make the electoral college simply a formality that confirms the results of the popular election.
thejeff wrote:

Just for the record, there's a simpler way to shift from the electoral college to a popular vote system.

The proposal is for states to agree to allocate their votes to the winner of the popular vote, if states controlling a majority of the electoral votes do so. A number of states have already signed on.

While I think it's a valiant effort, there are legal and sociopolitical hurdles that this needs to pass before it works as intended. Even if enough states get on board, it has to survive challenge in the courts (it stands a good chance of it based on precedent), and the much more formidable challenge of the inevitable conservative (probably Republican-led) backlash.


The electoral vote (except for the fact that, in some states, the electoral voters don't have to vote with the people) doesn't deserve as much of my mindshare as the greater problem of the first past the post problem. The majority of people support fiscal conservatism (i.e. not passing the debt onto the next generation) and social conservatism (i.e. keeping the government out of our private lives). But, the first past the post problem keeps government from showing it.


Darkwing Duck wrote:
The electoral vote (except for the fact that, in some states, the electoral voters don't have to vote with the people) doesn't deserve as much of my mindshare as the greater problem of the first past the post problem.

First-past-the-post isn't a "problem" unless you both a) have political views substantially outside normative bounds, and b) have managed to convince yourself that enough other people share your views that you could eventually wrangle voters into listing your candidates high enough on a preferential voting scale.

The underlying argument that you're adopting, here, is that major politicians have no idea how many people actually support the views of 3rd-party candidates, and that if they could just see how many people support them in a national election, they'd wake up and insert your pet issues into their platforms.

That's a fiction. Politicians and political campaigns have very good ideas of what issues are important to whom. Much better than you do.


Scott Betts wrote:
Darkwing Duck wrote:
The electoral vote (except for the fact that, in some states, the electoral voters don't have to vote with the people) doesn't deserve as much of my mindshare as the greater problem of the first past the post problem.

First-past-the-post isn't a "problem" unless you both a) have political views substantially outside normative bounds, and b) have managed to convince yourself that enough other people share your views that you could eventually wrangle voters into listing your candidates high enough on a preferential voting scale.

The underlying argument that you're adopting, here, is that major politicians have no idea how many people actually support the views of 3rd-party candidates, and that if they could just see how many people support them in a national election, they'd wake up and insert your pet issues into their platforms.

That's a fiction. Politicians and political campaigns have very good ideas of what issues are important to whom. Much better than you do.

What politicians know is how to get funding. But getting funding is not the same thing as going after the popular vote.

Politicians know how to play the game. And, yes, how the game is structured has a lot to do with how it is won. That's not just me saying that. Some of the top political minds around (including Duverger and Riker) have pointed out the first past the post problem.


Scott Betts wrote:
You have two choices: vote, or don't vote. But don't blame the system when you choose the latter. If you choose not to vote, you have also chosen to be a non-participant in any political discussions until the next election season.

Sez who?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
You have two choices: vote, or don't vote. But don't blame the system when you choose the latter. If you choose not to vote, you have also chosen to be a non-participant in any political discussions until the next election season.
Sez who?

Not casting a ballot doesn't mean non-voting... some of us ust cast our votes differently {rubs more tung oil on guillotine frame} Plus, re-counts are real easy: just look in the basket and re-count the heads.

I promise to do a better job keeping the blade sharp though. Sorry about the Chad incident, the way his head hung on by his fat cholesterol plaque-filled jugular.

{turns back to TV and watching Gnome Abram's "This Old Workshop" with this weeks project: building a trebuchet to fling all those severed heads}

1 to 50 of 92 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / [USA, Politics] Can I Vote? All Messageboards