my 70 year old mom has been working ten hours a day for the last month talking to poorly informed, lackadaisacal, cynical and apolitical people ...trying to get them to vote on tuesday.
Thank you, I would like to say a word about my mom. My 81 year old mom is running the Southern Arizona campaign for Attorney General Terry Goddard. (So AZ strutters, get out there and vote.) She has worked for countless good politicians for 6 decades who have lost. Goddard is one of the very few people she has supported who has won. Never did she give up and let the forces of evil take over.
She broke her elbow last week and is now in a hand to shoulder cast, so say something nice about my mom.
Dan, I mean absolutely no disrespect to you, Tony, or your respective mothers, but these are some highly fallacious arguments. Everyone you love and admire could be fighting for what they believe in, but at no point in time does that mean anyone else has to believe in the same things. Using shame and peer pressure to get people to vote seems pretty underhanded and disrespectful to me.
I hope your mother recovers quickly.
I learned guilt tripping from my mom, so no doubt, I am guilty as charged.
My point is not to shame anyone. My point is that I believe in working toward a better world. I try to do that in my life. I want other people to do that in their lives. (I can't do it alone.) Voting is one small (but important) part of that. I have tried to spell out ways that voting makes a difference. I have also tried to explain what it means in my life. I suppose that is pressure, and I am a peer, so for that I wont apologize.
When it comes to voting I have no respect for apathy or cynicism. I don't care if you vote with me or against me, it is the act of voting that is important. why does your every post have the tone of a very earnest 15 year olds journal entry? there is nothing so facile as the belief that the act of voting is somehow inherently worthy. Its far better to abstain out of careful consideration than to vote for a candidate on the thoughtless rationale so commonly employed by many voters.
Dude you need to move to Portland. You could be voting for one of two candidates to the Oregon Supreme court who are certified liberals. It's been two decades since we had a bona fide conservative on the city council and school board peeps can actually make a difference. We are also voting to tax ourselves to pay for schools since the proprty tax limitation totally fucked things up in the mid 80s.
My guess is that what you are really looking for is some pie-in-sky Green Party meets Keg Party meets Life of the Party leadership.
Crink what are you looking for out of your gov't? Lay some ideals on us.
I do blame you for not trying to change the situation.
Again, is Jeff expressing any opposition to affecting change in society? Or is he saying he feels that voting is no longer an effective enough use of one's voice?
No, but I get the impression Jeff isn't very active politically. There are always avenues to empower yourself politically, and they certainly don't involve voting. If the complaint is that these avenues don't exist, then that's just incorrect. But if the complain is voting actually doesn't empower the individual (which in Jeff's case I agree would be the case), then he is perfectly correct in his orientation.
If I lived in America, I probably wouldn't vote either, which is why I don't blame crink at all. Furthermore, I think it's totally silly that someone should be forced to vote for a candidate they do not agree with for the sake a bullshit moral argument. Which is what everyone is trying to force upon Jeff.
faux-rills says i am not educated enough about politics to vote. So i will be staying away from the ballot box this time.
What I said was that anyone equally enthusiastic about voting for Barack Obama or John McCain was probably not sufficiently educated on the differences between the two candidates and their parties to vote responsibly.
I encourage you both to educate yourself and to get out and vote.
I do blame you for not trying to change the situation.
Again, is Jeff expressing any opposition to affecting change in society? Or is he saying he feels that voting is no longer an effective enough use of one's voice?
No, but I get the impression Jeff isn't very active politically. There are always avenues to empower yourself politically, and they certainly don't involve voting. If the complaint is that these avenues don't exist, then that's just incorrect. But if the complain is voting actually doesn't empower the individual (which in Jeff's case I agree would be the case), then he is perfectly correct in his orientation.
If I lived in America, I probably wouldn't vote either, which is why I don't blame crink at all. Furthermore, I think it's totally silly that someone should be forced to vote for a candidate they do not agree with for the sake a bullshit moral argument. Which is what everyone is trying to force upon Jeff.
If the Republicans control Congress this time next week I am holding Jeff personally responsible.
Also, and I know this isn't really related, but I'm going to put it there: if I don't feel like my self-actualization and personal happiness are all that they could be, I also intend to hold Jeff responsible.
I do blame you for not trying to change the situation.
Again, is Jeff expressing any opposition to affecting change in society? Or is he saying he feels that voting is no longer an effective enough use of one's voice?
No, but I get the impression Jeff isn't very active politically. There are always avenues to empower yourself politically, and they certainly don't involve voting. If the complaint is that these avenues don't exist, then that's just incorrect. But if the complain is voting actually doesn't empower the individual (which in Jeff's case I agree would be the case), then he is perfectly correct in his orientation.
If I lived in America, I probably wouldn't vote either, which is why I don't blame crink at all. Furthermore, I think it's totally silly that someone should be forced to vote for a candidate they do not agree with for the sake a bullshit moral argument. Which is what everyone is trying to force upon Jeff.
If the Republicans control Congress this time next week I am holding Jeff personally responsible.
Also, and I know this isn't really related, but I'm going to put it there: if I don't feel like my self-actualization and personal happiness are all that they could be, I also intend to hold Jeff responsible.
i'm not going to add too much to this thread other than i am thinking of voting for some of the socialist candidates here in pa.
youre a fucking scumbag.
Do you really need any other reason to go vote?
I always find it off that on threads like this where someone is being called out for not voting--but then someone--like myself-- feels disenfranchised from the two parties and thinks of voting for someone who more represents their views. unfortunately, here in pa. --there isn't any socialists on the ballot -- at least not for senate or gov. and there are none in my district.
leaves some wondering what kind of a democracy we have, particularly if we cannot find someone who espouses similar views. i refuse to vote for casey in pa. because he is 'not santorum'. i never tell people who to vote for or call them scumbugs for voting for who they chooose. in the us, one should be allowed to have that right to vote or not vote for whomever they wish.
you can call one lazy for not voting, and many times it is true--but--sometimes, it isn't laziness that makes people not want to vote--sometimes it is the candidates.
-there isn't any socialists on the ballot -- leaves some wondering what kind of a democracy we have, particularly if we cannot find someone who espouses similar views.
I'm pretty certain that Socialists have no place in a Democracy.....cept maybe in Ireland
why does your every post have the tone of a very earnest 15 year olds journal entry? there is nothing so facile as the belief that the act of voting is somehow inherently worthy. Its far better to abstain out of careful consideration than to vote for a candidate on the thoughtless rationale so commonly employed by many voters. Because, in my aged state, I no longer admire the cynicism that seemed so cool when I was young. Also I grew up listening to Pete Segger.
I do believe that the act of voting is inherently worthy.
I disagree with everything in this sentence: "Its far better to abstain out of careful consideration than to vote for a candidate on the thoughtless rationale so commonly employed by many voters."
Careful consideration will tell you how to vote, not to abstain. What may seem like thoughtless rationale to you or me, may be very important to that voter.
why does your every post have the tone of a very earnest 15 year olds journal entry? there is nothing so facile as the belief that the act of voting is somehow inherently worthy. Its far better to abstain out of careful consideration than to vote for a candidate on the thoughtless rationale so commonly employed by many voters.
Because, in my aged state, I no longer admire the cynicism that seemed so cool when I was young. Also I grew up listening to Pete Segger.
I do believe that the act of voting is inherently worthy.
I disagree with everything in this sentence: "Its far better to abstain out of careful consideration than to vote for a candidate on the thoughtless rationale so commonly employed by many voters."
Careful consideration will tell you how to vote, not to abstain. What may seem like thoughtless rationale to you or me, may be very important to that voter.
I agree--it's rare that I encounter a candidate for national office about whom I can get excited but it's rarer still that one candidate does not appear to me to be worse than the other.
Back in 2000, I even remember people saying "Bush, Gore, what's the difference?"--that would be funny in retrospect, if what actually happened over the course of the past six years wasn't so sad.
i'm not going to add too much to this thread other than i am thinking of voting for some of the socialist candidates here in pa.
youre a fucking scumbag.
Do you really need any other reason to go vote?
I always find it off that on threads like this where someone is being called out for not voting--but then someone--like myself-- feels disenfranchised from the two parties and thinks of voting for someone who more represents their views. unfortunately, here in pa. --there isn't any socialists on the ballot -- at least not for senate or gov. and there are none in my district.
leaves some wondering what kind of a democracy we have, particularly if we cannot find someone who espouses similar views. i refuse to vote for casey in pa. because he is 'not santorum'. i never tell people who to vote for or call them scumbugs for voting for who they chooose. in the us, one should be allowed to have that right to vote or not vote for whomever they wish.
you can call one lazy for not voting, and many times it is true--but--sometimes, it isn't laziness that makes people not want to vote--sometimes it is the candidates.
First, I hope you realize it was Dolo not me calling people scumbags.
Write in a canidate or don't vote for senate, but vote on other races.
The elderly, who are single largest voting block, live in a socialsit country. They receive both socialized income and medicine. They have more access to socialized housing and transportation. If young people voted they could get socialized medicine as well. More likely from Casey than Santorium.
The elderly, who are single largest voting block, live in a socialsit country. They receive both socialized income and medicine. They have more access to socialized housing and transportation. If young people voted they could get socialized medicine as well. More likely from Casey than Santorium.
Really? Damn. I never knew old people participated in economic democracy (ala workers democracy).
And if you didn't get the sarcasm:
Welfare state (NOT EQUAL TO) socialism.
Now back to discussing voting. Oh, and also basing your arguments on moral premises which you probably don't share with other members and are therefore total void of any argumentation.
I do not believe in pulling a lever down straight ticket--unless i happen to know the positions of the individual candidates. stuff like that probably got a lot of the wrong people elected. take for example--racist dixiecrats from as recent as the 90s--to that ninny in ga. that was finally defeated. or the countless republicans who gave people hell.
i believe in informed voters. if one isn't informed on all the issues, encourage that person to do so--but telling them to blindly vote for a party that is presumably the lesser of two evils, is equally lame.
and, sometimes some people on threads like this say, "well--at least vote for somebody--just VOTE." but then some of the same people that say this, get flustered when they find out you are voting third party. then i ask what one proposes for those that feel disenfranchised by the two parties--and do not want to work within their framework--do? be further disenfranchised by not even having that record of voting for someone that has no chances, but votes out of a statement against the system.
santorum is a terrible man. casey is a conservative democrat--no matter how much the ultra far right paints him out to be liberal--he is still a conservative democrat. i refuse to vote for that.
No government today is purely capitalist or socialist, there is a blend of each
The elderly receive the most benefits and considerations from our government and vote accordingly (BTW folks, keep in mind the government won't be able to afford to keep us this well off when we're in our 60s)
Perhaps if all folks of voting age let their voice be heard we could have something more akin to the welfare capitalism of some of the European countries... healthcare for all, not just the elderly...
Back in 2000, I even remember people saying "Bush, Gore, what's the difference?"--that would be funny in retrospect, if what actually happened over the course of the past six years wasn't so sad.
Word. It does make a big difference, even if all the advertizing is bullshit. Now that Al Gore is less interested in running the country and more interested in getting his message across, we see his true colors, and he's a pretty damn impressive guy.
I lose a lot of respect for people who don't vote when they have the opportunity, especially knowing very intelligent and politically aware people who cannot because they are not citizens of this country.
First, I hope you realize it was Dolo not me calling people scumbags.
Write in a canidate or don't vote for senate, but vote on other races.
The elderly, who are single largest voting block, live in a socialsit country. They receive both socialized income and medicine. They have more access to socialized housing and transportation. If young people voted they could get socialized medicine as well. More likely from Casey than Santorium.
You just gave a great reason not to vote. The more that vote the more people there are for politicians to woo and what is their standard method for doing so? goodies! treats! handouts!
Reaching into to my vast reserves of knowledge I bring forth my favourite bastiat quote:
"the state is the great fiction by which everyone endeavours to live at the expense of everyone else"
have you seen the size of the US's unfunded liabilites? america cant even afford to suport the shit we got going already and the more involved in the process the more 'sweeteners' will inevitably be added to this melange of doomed programs. Wealth must be created before its distributed, the more the flow of capital is aritifically altered the less wealth is created and the poorer we all eventually become.
i'm not going to add too much to this thread other than i am thinking of voting for some of the socialist candidates here in pa.
youre a fucking scumbag.
Socialism inevitably leads to tyranny and mass impoverishment. Even if youre too dumb to work out why this occurs in the abstract then the uniformity of result whereever socialism has been applied should be enough empirical evidence. I stand by the fucking scumbag comment.
Comments
I learned guilt tripping from my mom, so no doubt, I am guilty as charged.
My point is not to shame anyone. My point is that I believe in working toward a better world. I try to do that in my life. I want other people to do that in their lives. (I can't do it alone.) Voting is one small (but important) part of that. I have tried to spell out ways that voting makes a difference. I have also tried to explain what it means in my life. I suppose that is pressure, and I am a peer, so for that I wont apologize.
When it comes to voting I have no respect for apathy or cynicism. I don't care if you vote with me or against me, it is the act of voting that is important.
why does your every post have the tone of a very earnest 15 year olds journal entry? there is nothing so facile as the belief that the act of voting is somehow inherently worthy. Its far better to abstain out of careful consideration than to vote for a candidate on the thoughtless rationale so commonly employed by many voters.
My guess is that what you are really looking for is some pie-in-sky Green Party meets Keg Party meets Life of the Party leadership.
Crink what are you looking for out of your gov't? Lay some ideals on us.
Can you point me in the right direction? That sounds like a good time.
I don't even know anymore to be quite honest. maybe it's time to start up a commune in Alaska or something...
can I join?
sincerely,
-disenfranchised (ex) voter in socal
and sadly I know the issues and candidates. Just wish I had proof that my vote actually counted
If I lived in America, I probably wouldn't vote either, which is why I don't blame crink at all. Furthermore, I think it's totally silly that someone should be forced to vote for a candidate they do not agree with for the sake a bullshit moral argument. Which is what everyone is trying to force upon Jeff.
What I said was that anyone equally enthusiastic about voting for Barack Obama or John McCain was probably not sufficiently educated on the differences between the two candidates and their parties to vote responsibly.
I encourage you both to educate yourself and to get out and vote.
Do you really need any other reason to go vote?
I like babies so I'm thinking maybe this is a good way to go
If the Republicans control Congress this time next week I am holding Jeff personally responsible.
Also, and I know this isn't really related, but I'm going to put it there: if I don't feel like my self-actualization and personal happiness are all that they could be, I also intend to hold Jeff responsible.
And I will enthusiastically turn out to vote for Obama if that comes to pass.
the peer pressure reaches it's zenith.
I always find it off that on threads like this where someone is being called out for not voting--but then someone--like myself-- feels disenfranchised from the two parties and thinks of voting for someone who more represents their views. unfortunately, here in pa. --there isn't any socialists on the ballot -- at least not for senate or gov. and there are none in my district.
leaves some wondering what kind of a democracy we have, particularly if we cannot find someone who espouses similar views. i refuse to vote for casey in pa. because he is 'not santorum'.
i never tell people who to vote for or call them scumbugs for voting for who they chooose. in the us, one should be allowed to have that right to vote or not vote for whomever they wish.
you can call one lazy for not voting, and many times it is true--but--sometimes, it isn't laziness that makes people not want to vote--sometimes it is the candidates.
I'm pretty certain that Socialists have no place in a Democracy.....cept maybe in Ireland
why does your every post have the tone of a very earnest 15 year olds journal entry? there is nothing so facile as the belief that the act of voting is somehow inherently worthy. Its far better to abstain out of careful consideration than to vote for a candidate on the thoughtless rationale so commonly employed by many voters.
Because, in my aged state, I no longer admire the cynicism that seemed so cool when I was young. Also I grew up listening to Pete Segger.
I do believe that the act of voting is inherently worthy.
I disagree with everything in this sentence: "Its far better to abstain out of careful consideration than to vote for a candidate on the thoughtless rationale so commonly employed by many voters."
Careful consideration will tell you how to vote, not to abstain. What may seem like thoughtless rationale to you or me, may be very important to that voter.
I agree--it's rare that I encounter a candidate for national office about whom I can get excited but it's rarer still that one candidate does not appear to me to be worse than the other.
Back in 2000, I even remember people saying "Bush, Gore, what's the difference?"--that would be funny in retrospect, if what actually happened over the course of the past six years wasn't so sad.
First, I hope you realize it was Dolo not me calling people scumbags.
Write in a canidate or don't vote for senate, but vote on other races.
The elderly, who are single largest voting block, live in a socialsit country. They receive both socialized income and medicine. They have more access to socialized housing and transportation. If young people voted they could get socialized medicine as well. More likely from Casey than Santorium.
And if you didn't get the sarcasm:
Welfare state (NOT EQUAL TO) socialism.
Now back to discussing voting. Oh, and also basing your arguments on moral premises which you probably don't share with other members and are therefore total void of any argumentation.
i believe in informed voters. if one isn't informed on all the issues, encourage that person to do so--but telling them to blindly vote for a party that is presumably the lesser of two evils, is equally lame.
and, sometimes some people on threads like this say, "well--at least vote for somebody--just VOTE."
but then some of the same people that say this, get flustered when they find out you are voting third party. then i ask what one proposes for those that feel disenfranchised by the two parties--and do not want to work within their framework--do? be further disenfranchised by not even having that record of voting for someone that has no chances, but votes out of a statement against the system.
santorum is a terrible man. casey is a conservative democrat--no matter how much the ultra far right paints him out to be liberal--he is still a conservative democrat. i refuse to vote for that.
No government today is purely capitalist or socialist, there is a blend of each
The elderly receive the most benefits and considerations from our government and vote accordingly (BTW folks, keep in mind the government won't be able to afford to keep us this well off when we're in our 60s)
Perhaps if all folks of voting age let their voice be heard we could have something more akin to the welfare capitalism of some of the European countries... healthcare for all, not just the elderly...
Word. It does make a big difference, even if all the advertizing is bullshit. Now that Al Gore is less interested in running the country and more interested in getting his message across, we see his true colors, and he's a pretty damn impressive guy.
I lose a lot of respect for people who don't vote when they have the opportunity, especially knowing very intelligent and politically aware people who cannot because they are not citizens of this country.
You just gave a great reason not to vote. The more that vote the more people there are for politicians to woo and what is their standard method for doing so? goodies! treats! handouts!
Reaching into to my vast reserves of knowledge I bring forth my favourite bastiat quote:
"the state is the great fiction by which everyone endeavours to live at the expense of everyone else"
have you seen the size of the US's unfunded liabilites? america cant even afford to suport the shit we got going already and the more involved in the process the more 'sweeteners' will inevitably be added to this melange of doomed programs. Wealth must be created before its distributed, the more the flow of capital is aritifically altered the less wealth is created and the poorer we all eventually become.
Socialism inevitably leads to tyranny and mass impoverishment. Even if youre too dumb to work out why this occurs in the abstract then the uniformity of result whereever socialism has been applied should be enough empirical evidence. I stand by the fucking scumbag comment.
When people realized that it wasn't a funny joke.
You lose the right to talk shit about how things are when you make no attempt to change it.
Apathy is for suckers.