Pages: 1 2 3 4

 

Poll

Choose my candidate

Jimmy McMillan19%19% - 6
Kristin Davis38%38% - 12
Carl Paladino12%12% - 4
Andrew Cuomo6%6% - 2
Warren Redlich0%0% - 0
Howie Hawkins9%9% - 3
Charles Barron12%12% - 4
Total: 31
2010-11-02 09:07:10
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5636|London, England

Ticia wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


Ahh, but on the flipside, it does lend credibility to the sham.
Apathy gives more credibility, honestly.  At least voting for someone, even if you think they'll lose, shows support for something else within the state.  Not voting at all shows support for nothing.
In a country like the US where a real alternative to the Republican/Democrat dichotomy doesn't exist, abstention is more than apathy... is protest.
It's not though. It's actually the complete opposite since most candidates would rather have low voter turnout since the vote is then along party lines and predictable. Independent voters scare the shit out of candidates because we can swing either way.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-11-02 16:56:46
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6723|The Land of Scott Walker

Ticia wrote:

In a country like the US where a real alternative to the Republican/Democrat dichotomy doesn't exist, abstention is more than apathy... is protest.
How is voting for nothing protest?  At least do a write in candidate or something.
2010-11-02 16:59:15
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5515|Cleveland, Ohio
not really.  you have the option to chose nobody.  whats the point of voting nobody?
2010-11-02 18:20:40
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6723|The Land of Scott Walker
No idea, apparently to "protest" ... and act superior to everyone because the perfect candidate has yet to descend from the clouds.
2010-11-02 19:41:02
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6953|Canberra, AUS
Voting nobody is only really a protest vote when you have to vote...
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2010-11-02 20:55:43
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6683|North Carolina

Ticia wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

Ticia wrote:


Why vote,then?
If you don't vote, then how can you hope the absurdity of NYS politics will change?
Can you register a null/blank vote in your election?
In Nevada, you can vote for "none of the above."  It's one of the few sane things about Nevada.
2010-11-03 07:59:34
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6408|North Tonawanda, NY

JohnG@lt wrote:

Ticia wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

Apathy gives more credibility, honestly.  At least voting for someone, even if you think they'll lose, shows support for something else within the state.  Not voting at all shows support for nothing.
In a country like the US where a real alternative to the Republican/Democrat dichotomy doesn't exist, abstention is more than apathy... is protest.
It's not though. It's actually the complete opposite since most candidates would rather have low voter turnout since the vote is then along party lines and predictable. Independent voters scare the shit out of candidates because we can swing either way.
And looking at the results of the NYS gubernatorial election, that's just what happened.

Cuomo , Andrew     Dem     2,532,447     62%
Paladino , Carl     GOP     1,399,235     34%
Hawkins , Howie     Grn         56,868         1%
Redlich , Warren     Lib         44,696         1%
McMillan , Jimmy     Oth         39,850         1%
Davis , Kristin     Oth         22,775         1%
Barron , Charles     Fre         20,717         1%

So basically, there were 4,116,588 votes (approximately), but according to the US census, there are about 15,125,084 people in NYS 18 or older (people of voting age).  What a pathetic turnout...only 27% of the state's voters bothered to cast a vote for governor?  Sigh...

Edit: This is why casting a 'null vote' or abstaining would do nothing in NY.  Almost 75% of the population does that already!

Last edited by SenorToenails (2010-11-03 08:02:11)

2010-11-03 09:52:08
Ticia
Member
+73|5613

Stingray24 wrote:

Ticia wrote:

In a country like the US where a real alternative to the Republican/Democrat dichotomy doesn't exist, abstention is more than apathy... is protest.
How is voting for nothing protest?  At least do a write in candidate or something.
I guess you find your vote worthless then.
Voting for the best of two evils has been ruining democracy for too long now. Get a NO CANDIDATE DESERVES MY VOTE on the ballot and then maybe if people wise up things can change.
2010-11-03 09:55:30
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6683|North Carolina

Ticia wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

Ticia wrote:

In a country like the US where a real alternative to the Republican/Democrat dichotomy doesn't exist, abstention is more than apathy... is protest.
How is voting for nothing protest?  At least do a write in candidate or something.
I guess you find your vote worthless then.
Voting for the best of two evils has been ruining democracy for too long now. Get a NO CANDIDATE DESERVES MY VOTE on the ballot and then maybe if people wise up things can change.
I kind of agree with Senor on this one.  As he put it, the people who choose not to vote are essentially doing that already.

Change actually starts with people educating themselves.  With a better informed and more rational electorate, you generally end up with better candidates.

Granted, getting the American public to become more educated and rational is wishful thinking of the highest order.

We're kind of fucked no matter what, to be honest.  It's really just a matter of damage control at this point.  We're going to slowly fall in primacy and standard of living, but it's a matter of making sure the transition period is slow enough that we can suitably adapt.
2010-11-03 09:57:57
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6815|Long Island, New York

SenorToenails wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Ticia wrote:


In a country like the US where a real alternative to the Republican/Democrat dichotomy doesn't exist, abstention is more than apathy... is protest.
It's not though. It's actually the complete opposite since most candidates would rather have low voter turnout since the vote is then along party lines and predictable. Independent voters scare the shit out of candidates because we can swing either way.
And looking at the results of the NYS gubernatorial election, that's just what happened.

Cuomo , Andrew     Dem     2,532,447     62%
Paladino , Carl     GOP     1,399,235     34%
Hawkins , Howie     Grn         56,868         1%
Redlich , Warren     Lib         44,696         1%
McMillan , Jimmy     Oth         39,850         1%
Davis , Kristin     Oth         22,775         1%
Barron , Charles     Fre         20,717         1%

So basically, there were 4,116,588 votes (approximately), but according to the US census, there are about 15,125,084 people in NYS 18 or older (people of voting age).  What a pathetic turnout...only 27% of the state's voters bothered to cast a vote for governor?  Sigh...

Edit: This is why casting a 'null vote' or abstaining would do nothing in NY.  Almost 75% of the population does that already!
Wow. Those are absolutely stunning numbers.

Around my college I was asking a lot of people if they'd voted and the general answer was no. My good friend Rony (former Marine!) voted, but he was the only one.
2010-11-03 10:09:45
Ticia
Member
+73|5613

Turquoise wrote:

Ticia wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

How is voting for nothing protest?  At least do a write in candidate or something.
I guess you find your vote worthless then.
Voting for the best of two evils has been ruining democracy for too long now. Get a NO CANDIDATE DESERVES MY VOTE on the ballot and then maybe if people wise up things can change.
I kind of agree with Senor on this one.  As he put it, the people who choose not to vote are essentially doing that already.

Change actually starts with people educating themselves.  With a better informed and more rational electorate, you generally end up with better candidates.

Granted, getting the American public to become more educated and rational is wishful thinking of the highest order.

We're kind of fucked no matter what, to be honest.  It's really just a matter of damage control at this point.  We're going to slowly fall in primacy and standard of living, but it's a matter of making sure the transition period is slow enough that we can suitably adapt.
I believed that BS too but truth is the system will never change. Better informed people will realise politics is nothing but money and image so the only protest citizens have is their vote, if enough use it wisely then change is possible. Maybe not in our lifetime but it is possible one day.
2010-11-03 10:16:53
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6683|North Carolina

Ticia wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Ticia wrote:


I guess you find your vote worthless then.
Voting for the best of two evils has been ruining democracy for too long now. Get a NO CANDIDATE DESERVES MY VOTE on the ballot and then maybe if people wise up things can change.
I kind of agree with Senor on this one.  As he put it, the people who choose not to vote are essentially doing that already.

Change actually starts with people educating themselves.  With a better informed and more rational electorate, you generally end up with better candidates.

Granted, getting the American public to become more educated and rational is wishful thinking of the highest order.

We're kind of fucked no matter what, to be honest.  It's really just a matter of damage control at this point.  We're going to slowly fall in primacy and standard of living, but it's a matter of making sure the transition period is slow enough that we can suitably adapt.
I believed that BS too but truth is the system will never change. Better informed people will realise politics is nothing but money and image so the only protest citizens have is their vote, if enough use it wisely then change is possible. Maybe not in our lifetime but it is possible one day.
Well, I think a more informed and rational public would lead to more rational campaigns toward issues that actually matter.  We tend to see this more often with smaller, urbanized countries that are mostly homogeneous in culture.  It's not that these people are really that much more intelligent, but they tend to be better educated, and it's easier to focus on real financial issues when everyone generally agrees to the same ground rules for society.

When you have a large population with a myriad of different mindsets and educational backgrounds, it might lead to innovation, but it also leads to very little unity or progress toward getting much of anything done.
2010-11-03 10:27:58
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6689|'Murka

Turquoise wrote:

When you have a large population with a myriad of different mindsets and educational backgrounds, it might lead to innovation, but it also leads to very little unity or progress toward getting much of anything done.
while I agree with the basics of the discussion on lack of rational debate on the core of issues...that statement above is a contradiction in terms.

You can't have innovation and not have progress.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2010-11-03 10:30:34
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5636|London, England

FEOS wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

When you have a large population with a myriad of different mindsets and educational backgrounds, it might lead to innovation, but it also leads to very little unity or progress toward getting much of anything done.
while I agree with the basics of the discussion on lack of rational debate on the core of issues...that statement above is a contradiction in terms.

You can't have innovation and not have progress.
And you can't have progress when everyone is a clone.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-11-03 11:57:01
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6683|North Carolina

FEOS wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

When you have a large population with a myriad of different mindsets and educational backgrounds, it might lead to innovation, but it also leads to very little unity or progress toward getting much of anything done.
while I agree with the basics of the discussion on lack of rational debate on the core of issues...that statement above is a contradiction in terms.

You can't have innovation and not have progress.
Eh...  point taken.

JohnG@lt wrote:

And you can't have progress when everyone is a clone.
Well, it's not about people being clones.  It's about having more common ground.

The differences between the right and left in most European countries are considerably less prominent than the differences between our sides.

I almost get the impression I'm living in 2 different countries at the same time.  It can get rather nerve-racking at times.
2010-11-03 13:48:57
Doctor Strangelove
Real Battlefield Veterinarian.
+1,758|6746
I didn't vote because I knew that Cuomo would win anyway.

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard