Thread: Where Do We Draw The Line?

Originally Posted by Theseus

Why should I vote if I don't believe in or agree with any of the candidates? Having the right to vote is also having the right to not vote.

Nope....Although free elections are part of the freedoms we enjoy, I believe voting is an obligation not a right. Its one of the very, very small prices we pay for democracy.

Theseus, I'm sure you're a great guy, but you're off the mark on this one.

Originally Posted by joebehar

Nope....Although free elections are part of the freedoms we enjoy, I believe voting is an obligation not a right. Its one of the very, very small prices we pay for democracy.Theseus, I'm sure you're a great guy, but you're off the mark on this one.

I never said I don't vote. I'm saying that you shouldn't feel "obligated" to vote if the only reason you are voting is to choose the lesser of two evils. I tend to hold my moral obligations much higher than my political ones.

Originally Posted by joebehar

Nope....Although free elections are part of the freedoms we enjoy, I believe voting is an obligation not a right. Its one of the very, very small prices we pay for democracy.

Theseus, I'm sure you're a great guy, but you're off the mark on this one.

+1 I was actually quite surprised at the voter turnout for the 2008 presidential elections. But even at 58% That means that 30% of the voters determined who would lead the country for the next four years. Little wonder our elected officials run buck wild when nearly half of the voting aged public isn't engaged enough or just doesn't care to go vote. True, lots of elections boil down to the lesser of two evils but it seems to me that if you flat don't vote, that's one less vote that the crappiest candidate will have to get to be elected. What if 30% of the vote wouldn't win an election? What if it took a full 51%? Seems to me that while whoever this person was, I probably wouldn't agree with all of his platform but if 51% of the voting age public voted for him, I think odds are good that he/she would do a good job. If not, he/she would have a tough time getting re-elected. Call me a simpleton if you will but a lot of these crooks run our country and line their own pockets simply because we're too tired, or too busy to let them know we won't take it anymore. Then there's the other half of the equation, career politicians, lobbyists and labor unions. The first two should be outlawed and labor unions should not be allowed to make political contributions on behalf of their members (IMHO).

So you want to draw the line towards mandatory voting? Doesn't sound like a step toward more freedom to me. For most people voting is a waste of time.
Of course, you can do a market based solution - let voters be able to openly sell their vote to the highest bidder. You'll probably get the same results as now, but at lower overall cost.

Originally Posted by gugi

So you want to draw the line towards mandatory voting? Doesn't sound like a step toward more freedom to me. For most people voting is a waste of time.
Of course, you can do a market based solution - let voters be able to openly sell their vote to the highest bidder. You'll probably get the same results as now, but at lower overall cost.

No wasn't suggesting mandatory voting but it would be much better if people saw it as a civic duty than simply throwing up their hands and saying screw it (as tempting as that may be.) I guess I haven't answered the question yet. Where do I draw the line? Not sure, but I'm pretty sure when I put to to words, I'll get beat to death over it.

Originally Posted by joebehar

I believe voting is an obligation not a right.

I believe the obligation ought to be educating yourself about the candidates before voting.

Just before the last election I was watching TV with my sister, there was a guy that looked like Obama and I said, "Wow - that guy looks a lot like Barack Obama."
She said "Who is that?"

How does a vote from someone like that help anyone?

(note: my sister doesn't vote - and I think that's a good thing.)