profit

i say nay.. lol i just voted.

i was going to post this in the RP2012 thread, because it summarizes well what i was getting at, but the thread fell down the queue and this topic deserves it's own thread. what david icke says is what i agree with. i think that is truth. we send a bigger message by not voting and saying "were through with your fucking games" than we do saying "vote for RP, vote for liberty." not participating sends a real message, one that says, "no more. we are serious."

what ken o'keef says great too.


tldr: voting, do you do it motherfucker? why/ whynot?

__________________

The Rev

I agree that voting is pointless. It's having 1/300,000,000th share of a really poorly informed decision, and no substitute for real liberty or political influence. Besides, if Obama has proved anything, it's that it doesn't matter who's in office, business is still business as usual.

However, I do think that you don't make much of a statement by not voting. You're as lost in the anonymity and meaninglessness of the process just as much as if you voted. I think if you really want to say "enough is enough of this bullshit" then you gotta get out there with the OWS protesters, or do something else to promote the reality that the system is self-destructive and needs to be replaced. Just doing nothing is doing nothing, IMO.



The Rev

__________________

SageTree

Voting.... pointless.....

You mean there can be a popular vote of oh say... Al Gore...
And the Electoral College can still choose the loser.... who was actually a loser?

nah....!!!!!!!

__________________

Roach

yep, the electoral college (who in theory is accountable to the voters they represent) elects presidents.

To change it you need to petition to have this changed to election by popular vote, and have that resolution voted on in a general election.

If such a "We The People" Act were adopted/approved ,from that point on there would be a change.

not until.

__________________

לזיין את הקופים

SageTree

ROACH FOR PREZ on the Weird Party ticket!!!!

__________________

Roach

You got the party, I got the time.

So is house sitting like flag pole sitting ?

__________________

לזיין את הקופים

SageTree

Nah, it's less stressful on the old kiester for sure

__________________

snuggly winter

I'd agree voting for president in a national election is pointless, even the electoral college system is a poor method of selection, even if stratified to the individual states by some nonbinding agreement.

Not just in the American system, but any democratic system with national voting is ridiculous, even state-wide is too much to get an accurate democratic voice made. Regional/state offices are where the citizens should be more inclined to pay attention, because that is where most of the decisions prevalent to their daily lives are made.

__________________
"Don't hate the player, hate the game."
-Alexander Meikheljohn

stoneric

As much clout as the Fed has, I don't think state or regional elections give one a voice all that much either.

profit

seems like many of us are on the same page.
snuggly winter thank you for bringing up democracy. i will supplement your point with this illustration:

__________________

~1~

Be careful what you wish for, here in CA you can get anything on the ballot with 500,000 signatures, then it's off to the general election where those who vote actually decide on the initiative so if you want the change you speak of, even with a crooked system like the electoral college you need compulsory voting.

You ever notice anyone out thumping the campaign trail is hoppin' up and down for that right?

Fuck no, then you would actually HAVE to please all the people all the time not just the ones who jam your pockets full of money.



As far as voting goes, do it, it is your civic duty...



HOWEVER, if enough of us vote for 'None of the Above' we can put that wheel into motion. If enough people wake up the day after and the news vortex has declared none of the above the clear winner in all reporting precincts then maybe we stand united enough to give a shit.


I'm a dude in California and I approve this message.

__________________

profit

what you said makes me think.. there is a huge difference between voting in the sense that everyone thinks of it. and voting in your local government.

voting on different innitiatives for your city for example, are things that affect you and your community and i think voting in this way does a lot of good and helps the grass roots model of citizens being their own government. this is in true republic fashion. if everyone fixed their local gov things would be half better, and we would only have to worry about the feds and their out of bounds behaviour.

vote for your city council and what not as well.

i think though, that the system with it's rotten core would likely cheat and fraud their way to passing whatever NEEDS to be passed. defined by 'them', the them in your local gov, and those above them, the ones likely causing problems.

but on a national level voting is fucking pointless and i think nearly everyone can see this.

are there any other distinctions that people can think of? i have hope for local voting and grassroots type of change. that has been the answer of "how to fix" for long time.

__________________

Roach

wanna know why ?

In Congress, nearly half the members are millionaires

The Senate's median net worth is $2,630,000.00 ; in the House, it's $756,000.00

Just a few days into the new year, and we're already blitzed with wall-to-wall election coverage. But the fun is only just beginning. Before this election year is out, scores of congressional candidates will join the presidential contenders already dominating the airwaves.

If you observe their endless debates and expensive attack ads and get a sense that these candidates are out of touch with many of the pedestrian problems faced by the rest of us -- oh, say like trying to balance a family budget -- it's not just your imagination.

While most Americans saw their incomes and wealth slip in the past several years, the wealth of our reps in Washington, D.C., has grown by leaps and bounds. The key takeaway here: Being a millionaire would make any normal person a One-Percenter, a member of the nation’s wealthiest group. In Congress, it just makes you average.

Consider these numbers:

Nearly half of the members of Congress are millionaires, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), a Washington watchdog.
The median net worth of a U.S. senator was $2.63 million in 2010, the most recent year for which financial data are available. That was up 11% from the year before, says CRP.
The median estimated net worth for House members was $756,765.
The median net worth of House members almost tripled from 1984 and 2009, while the net worth of Americans declined slightly during the same time, according to the Washington Post and the University of Michigan.

"It's no surprise that so many people grumble about lawmakers being out of touch," said Sheila Krumholz, CRP executive director. And it's not only the news of their costly yachts and expensive vacations that rankles.

It's also the sense that our One-Percenter reps in Washington aren't doing enough to help the rest of us, perhaps because they are so distracted by their embarrassingly rancorous bipartisan arguing -- which has earned them their most unfavorable ratings in years.

Bickering over the budget last summer, for example, brought the threat of a U.S. credit rating downgrade, helping to shave billions off our stock holdings in just a few painful weeks.

A recent Congressional Budget Office study found that public policy efforts -- in the tax code and through programs like Medicaid -- now do less to combat income inequality than they did in 1979.

And three years after the worst financial meltdown in decades -- which many blame on lax oversight of the financial sector by Washington -- our economy is improving, but not fast enough to provide jobs for the millions who are unemployed.

It’s not hard, either, to suggest a little bias toward the One Percent, and a bipartisan one. For all the talk about rescinding the portion of the Bush tax cuts that apply to the highest income brackets, they survived two years with a Democratic president and Democratic majority in both houses of Congress as well as the current, divided Congress. And late in 2011, House Republicans took lots of criticism for stalling on a 2% payroll tax that by its nature helped those in the lower brackets more than the One Percent.

So who’s richest in Congress?

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., tops the CRP list as the wealthiest of the lot, with an estimated 2010 net worth of $448 million. He's followed by Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, with an estimated net worth of $380 million.

Just how did these reps get so wealthy? Probably not on the $174,000 they make a year, despite the juicy perks like extra pay for senior posts and generous medical and pension benefits. Most likely, they're so much richer than the rest of us simply because campaigning is expensive, so politics naturally attracts wealthy people. Many of them made their riches in real estate, or they got their wealth through inheritances and marriage.

But shrewd stock picking also clearly help. Studies by Alan Ziobrowski at Georgia State University conclude that our reps regularly outperform the markets by large amounts due to the “significant information advantage” they derive from their jobs.

Our reps may actually be a lot wealthier than the numbers provided by CRP suggest, since so much of their wealth goes unreported. The top bracket for assets of spouses is "more than $1 million," which means that family net worth is likely undervalued in many cases. Plus their annual filings exclude the value of government retirement accounts, primary residences and personal property not held for investment -- like artwork and cars.

In Congress nearly half the members are millionaires- MSN Money

__________________

לזיין את הקופים

kamikazi89

__________________
katie west is the best

Roach

if ever someone needed a target photoshoped on their head...it's greenspan .

Want some more deregulation ?

__________________

לזיין את הקופים

kitch

I've voted in every election since I could, even minor ones. My parents brought me up pretty involved in the Massachusetts Democratic Party so I feel obligated to vote every time. That said I'm registered independant and may well vote for Ron Paul in the primary. I just wish he wasn't so crazy.

__________________

Roach

I'm the opposite, I was registered independant since 1975.

Went Democrat last year, but really always leaned towards the wants and needs of the general population.

__________________

לזיין את הקופים

kitch

I think if you don't vote when you're allowed to you have absolutely no right to bitch about the government.

__________________

Roach

"Vote ,and the choice is your's.

Don't vote , and the choice is their's."

remember that old slogan ?

__________________

לזיין את הקופים

Waves

Why should the people who helped to create the problem be the only ones allowed to bitch about the problem?

This is some weird doublespeak logic right here.

Thats like saying only people who commit crimes have the right to bitch about the state of the prison system in the united states.

"ONLY THE PEOPLE WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE CORRUPT INCOMPETENT GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE ABLE TO COMMENT ON IT"

uh....i dont participate BECAUSE its corrupt and incompetent. And i have every right to bitch about the state of the system while declining participation. Arent we supposed to be the land of freedom of speech?

Or do you only get that "right" when you play along with the system?

__________________
On this life that we call home
The years go fast and the days go so slow