Comments on: Cluesday November 4th: on non-voting

By: paul of the clue-by-four

paul of the clue-by-four — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 16:23:42 +0000

Michelle, I’m really interested to see what happens with all the Obama supporters. If they spontaneously organize into some movement for change, inspired by and yet independent of the President, that’d be an enormous force for good. History shows damn few examples of anything like that happening, but there’s a first for everything and I’d be pleased to see it.

Nanagirl hits the nail on the head, as usual. Electoral politics are really not my trip; again, I’m not saying there’s NO difference at all between the parties, but it’s just not where the change I’m looking for is going to come from.

FJ, I’d love to see the Congress become like the Knesset or the Italian Parliament. Again, though, the electoral realm is perhaps the least interesting and relevant battleground for change, as far as I’m concerned.

Kate, Massachusetts apportions its electors on a winner-take-all basis. Whichever party gets a plurality takes the pot.

By: michelle of bleeding espresso

michelle of bleeding espresso — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 11:08:05 +0000

A large part of my support for Obama comes from the fact that he *seems* to have inspired millions of Americans to do something, anything to express and support their political beliefs. I sincerely hope this interest and action continues well into his presidency because if not, all that he worked for will have been in vain, and that would be a damn shame.

Great post.

By: nanagirl

nanagirl — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 06:55:33 +0000

What’s the point in playing a game that you don’t want to play?

By: FJ

FJ — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 03:06:08 +0000

Why not vote for a third party candidate like Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Chuck Baldwin, etc.? Men who want to defend the Constitution and end illegal wars abroad? The media won’t tell you this but there were more than two choices for president in this election, and I hope you at least paid attention to your State House of Representatives/State Senate and State ballot questions.

You’re correct in that the enormous presidential powers are not easily diminished, all the more reason to support a libertarian and/or constitutionalist nominee next time; someone who would seek to undo the illegal income taxes, empire abroad, and managed free trade that has gotten us into the mess we’re in today. Things were better in the early 1800s!

By: Kate T

Kate T — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 19:59:35 +0000

I respect your choice, but feel I have to throw my two pennies in here: People in other countries have DIED for the right to vote for a leader. We take it for granted here in this country to a shameful degree. As you say, your vote would only be “symbolic”, I guess you mean because of the electoral college votes. But how do you think those votes get assigned? By the number of citizens who schlepp down to the polls and make their choices known.

By throwing away your vote, and by encouraging others to do the same, you decrease the number of votes for your candidate, and in essence vote for the “other guy”. Don’t you think?

Kate

By: Cherrye at My Bella Vita

Cherrye at My Bella Vita — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:23:51 +0000

Nicely said. You echo my mother and sister who are both “not voting” for the first time in their lives.