VOTE

[Klep]

Election Day is tomorrow for the US.  Get your asses to the polls.

No partisanship in this thread, only requests and answers for voting information.  Poll times, where to vote, etc.

[Komatteru]

Since I basically live in my little cave, coming out only to go to class and Magic tournaments, I am completely uninformed, and my going to the polls would largely being equivalent to playing connect the dots based on name recognition.  Rather than make a completely random choice, I will make none at all.

[Klep]

Since I basically live in my little cave, coming out only to go to class and Magic tournaments, I am completely uninformed, and my going to the polls would largely being equivalent to playing connect the dots based on name recognition.  Rather than make a completely random choice, I will make none at all.

It's not too late to become informed.  Google your candidates' names, see what's been said about them in the news, by their campaigns, by the other campaign, etc.  There is a wealth of information available to you, and you have plenty of time to formulate an opinion.

[Fortifitakitors]

Alright. Connectians get out and vote for your candidates for your Representative and Senator! It is going to be tite!!!

[SpencerForHire]

Since I basically live in my little cave, coming out only to go to class and Magic tournaments, I am completely uninformed, and my going to the polls would largely being equivalent to playing connect the dots based on name recognition.  Rather than make a completely random choice, I will make none at all.

It's not too late to become informed.  Google your candidates' names, see what's been said about them in the news, by their campaigns, by the other campaign, etc.  There is a wealth of information available to you, and you have plenty of time to formulate an opinion.

I agree entirely with this and that was indeed my plan..

BTW, Vote Klep!

[Godder]

Since I basically live in my little cave, coming out only to go to class and Magic tournaments, I am completely uninformed, and my going to the polls would largely being equivalent to playing connect the dots based on name recognition.  Rather than make a completely random choice, I will make none at all.

That's no excuse - get out there and vote!

[Moxlotus]

DO NOT VOTE...

Unless you know the issues and where your candidates stand on them.  If you vote not knowing anything, you might as well be randomly filling in circles--and that's a terrible way to choose our leaders.

On another note, I feel if you don't vote then you have no right to bitch when some guy in Washington is being a dumbshit and screwed you over hard (whether it be on new taxes, a social issue, etc.)

[Anusien]

DO NOT VOTE...

Unless you know the issues and where your candidates stand on them.  If you vote not knowing anything, you might as well be randomly filling in circles--and that's a terrible way to choose our leaders.

On another note, I feel if you don't vote then you have no right to bitch when some guy in Washington is being a dumbshit and screwed you over hard (whether it be on new taxes, a social issue, etc.)

Who is 100% un-informed?  For example, if you have a strong feeling about the current direction of Congress, you can either cast a vote for that direction or against it.  If you like the way Congress is heading things, feel free to vote along that party line, and if you feel strongly against, feel free to vote along a different party line.  That's the whole point of political parties, to let people seem informed while not actually knowing anything.

[Matt]

American policies and American politicians have a large effect on portions of the world who cannot vote in this election. Their lives and livlihoods are greatly influenced by this election, yet they have no representation. With that fact in mind, I believe it is profoundly immoral for any American citizen not to vote in this election.

Because there are so many who have no voice, it is irresponsible, arrogant, disrespectful, and unappreciative for me not to use mine. There are millions of people who would die (and have died) for what I was freely given as a birthright, and it would be shameful for me to cast it aside unused.

Vote.

[Bardo]

Vote by Mail -- For the Win, as they say.

Oregon is awesome. Every year I get to sit down with a glass of wine (or T&T, depending on election), my ballot and the issues and candidates voter's pamphlets and have a good time. I finished my voting last night and turned my ballot in at the library today.

Those Diebold machines are for turkeys. Disfranchisement =

[orgcandman]

Make sure that you know more than just who you're voting for. Many ballots will contain questions about different issues that you should know. The impact of these issues is more than just "Can grocery stores sell wine?" and "Should we unionize our childcare providers?" Think about the impact these things have on different people and whether that impact is positive or negative.

-Aaron

[Moxlotus]

DO NOT VOTE...

Unless you know the issues and where your candidates stand on them.  If you vote not knowing anything, you might as well be randomly filling in circles--and that's a terrible way to choose our leaders.

On another note, I feel if you don't vote then you have no right to bitch when some guy in Washington is being a dumbshit and screwed you over hard (whether it be on new taxes, a social issue, etc.)

Who is 100% un-informed?  For example, if you have a strong feeling about the current direction of Congress, you can either cast a vote for that direction or against it.  If you like the way Congress is heading things, feel free to vote along that party line, and if you feel strongly against, feel free to vote along a different party line.  That's the whole point of political parties, to let people seem informed while not actually knowing anything.

You'd be surprised how many people don't know anything.  Or just know what is being told to them "ZOMG REPUBLICANS/DEMOCRAT voted against [insert bill]!  When they don't know that that politician didn't vote for that bill BECAUSE he wanted to vote for another bill on the same subject with a higher/lower amount of $ going to it.

Or people will blame the government for things that it has very little effect on.  Ex: I lost my job at the plant, Bush blows.  Clearly Bush had an effect on that factory's mismanagement of the market place or that the factory bought advanced equipment that replaced workers--which were the real reasons example facotry plant went under.  These are the people that I don't think should vote--they don't know what's going on or why things happen.  Of course, the inherent flaw in democracy is the uninformed and uneducated get to vote.

[Komatteru]

I once blamed Bush and his economic policies for my bad grades.


It didn't really help.

[The Atog Lord]

you might as well be randomly filling in circles--and that's a terrible way to choose our leaders.

Athens, the first democracy, actually selected many of its leaders at random. While it may not work well today, it would truely give people representation if used on a small population of citizens over a long period of time.

[ELD]

Those boy-lovers.

 
- King Leonidas of the Athenians in 300

On a different note, I'm disturbed that government has the right to decide so many issues for us.  Many issues that come before voters are things that I believe government should not even have a say in.  If slavery were on the ballot, I would not be voting.  I'd be protesting the fact that government has become to powerful again. 

[Moxlotus]

On a different note, I'm disturbed that government has the right to decide so many issues for us.  Many issues that come before voters are things that I believe government should not even have a say in.  If slavery were on the ballot, I would not be voting.  I'd be protesting the fact that government has become to powerful again.   

Then your issue should be with the Supreme Court not striking down enough laws and programs as unconstitutional.  I agree with you, the national government abuses the elastic clause too much I think.

[Komatteru]

The problem of government taking too much liberty in the decision making process might have something to do with too many apathetics like me who would really just rather not be bothered than get involved with anything remotely resembling politics.

[Hi-Val]

YOU GOTTA FIGHT FOR YOUR RIGHT TO PARTY

[nataz]

I like it when people don't vote, it makes my vote more important.

[dandan]

Get out and vote. By voting you become more important to politicians who in turn will actually spend a slightly higher percentage of your money on you and the things that you care about i.e. it is in your interest to vote. As a useful side-effect it might actually mean that you get a better government, or at least change the corrupt/useless for someone who is probably also corrupt/useless (for genetic reasons, the corrupt seem to be less prone to being useless, most corrupt and useless genes were probably hung out of the gene pool a while back) but might not be.

If you really can't stomach voting for any of the candidates, then use your vote in order to vote against the worst choice.

Hint: Cast your vote next to the name of the candidate you want to vote for.

[ELD]

The problem of government taking too much liberty in the decision making process might have something to do with too many apathetics like me who would really just rather not be bothered than get involved with anything remotely resembling politics.

You're not comprehending my point.  I do not believe that government (read the people) should be able to put everything to the vote.  I believe government should stay out of everything but what is absolutely necessary.  Government really only messes up everything it touches.  I am far from apathetic.  My government sickens.  To bring about the changes I speak about would require dedicating my life towards what would basically be a revolution.  That is something I cannot do right now.  Perhaps when my resources are more abundant I'll be able and willing to try. 

IMO the real downward spiral began in 1913 with the 16th amendment legalizing income tax.  From there the FDR administrations communist policies like Social Security have created an unworkable system destined to collapse under its own weight.  The government has been able to grow too massive, and now we just think Big Brother is going to handle all our problems.  Just for the record, I loathe the party system we have in effect.  George Washington's farewell address backs me up on that one

"However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people, and to usurp for themselves the reins of government; destroying afterwards the very engines, which have lifted them to unjust dominion."

The government has made you all complacent with voting for the lesser of two evils.  I call that apathy at it's worst.  The two party system ensures that we have no real choice.  The system makes sure that honest people with integrity are forced to run as a 3rd party because they do not exemplify one of the two major political parties views.  Putting the people's will before a parties agenda means you will not have a legit chance to bring about change, as you're not going to get elected. 

The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish Government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established Government.

When the time for change does come, Washington's words remind us that change must be brought about regardless of the rules that have been put in place by our current government.  I do not see how real change could be brought about by using the system that is currently in place. 

[Jacob Orlove]

Actually, there are a lot of positives to a two party system. If you look at proportional representation systems, fringe groups get a lot of power because they can make or break coalitions, but a more mainstream party can gain seats and yet lose influence when a different coalition forms. This makes it almost impossible for voters to control what the government does--they have more control over who they elect, certainly, but much less control over who actually ends up in control of the government. We, on the other hand, have less control over who gets elected, but much more control over what the government does.

There are certainly flaws in a two-party system (hello gerrymandering!), but it is possible to deal with those problems under the current system, if people vote. If you don't vote, you're actively making things worse.

As for the actively political stuff (big vs small government, income tax, etc), TMD is not the place. I'll ask people to refrain from continuing discussion on those points.

[vroman]

democracy = guaranteed mediocrity. Im rooting for coup dtat.

[Kasuras]

From wikipedia.org:

In a federal system, the senate often serves a balancing effect by giving a larger share of power to regions and groups which would otherwise be overwhelmed in a purely representative system. In the legislatures of U.S. states, senates were also used for this purpose until the 1963 case of Baker v. Carr, in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that state legislatures must apportion seats in both houses according to population. However, there are still typically fewer members of a state Senate than there are members of the lower house.

Apparently, this got changed. I won't dispute the reasons for this, but it's interesting in the discussion of a 2party system. Since one can choose to vote for senators from the 'ruling party' or from the opposition, the outcome of this vote will be that the 'ruling party' will either have an easier or harder time doing their job. I'm sure the senate has other duties as well, but I do think that most people in America vote for the ruling party if the government is doing their job well, simply for aforementioned reasons in the thread: lack of interest.

But wait! Why would you need to vote for the senate if the choice is based on the same arguments used for voting on a party in the elections for the government? You, as the voter, have given your faith in the government. Why would you want to cast your vote again before the term is over when you had faith in the government just a few years earlier? I honestly don't understand that: is 4 years such a long term that people have the need to show their faith, or sudden lack of, before the end of that? And wouldn't you end up in a downward spiral then? If you have lost faith in the government before those 4 years are over, who is to decide voting again because people might have lost faith in the government for the second time?

In Holland, we have a system of many parties: hell, even persons form parties. By voting for the Dutch equivalent of the House of Commons (I suppose that's easiest to imagine), you directly choose who gets to rule the country because the parties will make coalitions. Hence, the ruling parties also have the majority in the House of Commons. Pretty much the same result, except that you get to vote once every 4 years instead of two times.

Now on the subject of multiple party system: it's fairly clear that the coalition will be formed by the major parties. But that doesn't mean that the minor parties don't have any power in parliament, not at all: they can still perform their controlling role very well.

In summary:

Can someone in America please explain why they vote twice for the ruling party, or not, but then the ruling party won't be quite as ruling anymore. Why not just give up trust in the government so new votes can be cast? That's how it works in La Hollanda.

[nataz]

Not all senators come up for a vote at the same time. Is this where your confusion is coming from? Also, our state congress is different then our national congress.

The national senate (upper house) is made up for 2 senators from each state, regardless of population. (i.e., Maine gets 2 senators, and California gets 2 senators)

The congressional seats (lower house) are made up of congressmen from each state. The number of congressmen each state gets is proportional to their population. (i.e., Maine gets 2 congressmen, but California gets like a billion.)

The idea behind this is to have a majority rule, while protecting minority rights. Since bills pass though both the senate and the house, the senate acts as the protector of minority rights (Maine's votes = California's votes) while the house represents the will of the majority (Maine gets 2 votes = Cali gets a billion votes). This of course gets more complicated when you look at committee structure, but I don't think that is really that relevant to your question.

[Jacob Orlove]

We vote every two years because we don't simply hand the government over to the "ruling" party. Our votes for president, the senate, and the house are completely separate--in theory, a different party could be in power in each (in practice, it is quite common that neither party will control all three). Due to different term lengths for the presidency and both houses (4 years for the president, 6 for senators, 2 for members of the house), we hold elections every 2 years, for the house and a third of the senate. These overlap with the four year election cycle for president.

It's really almost nothing like the european system, so trying to understand it from that perspective is going to give you problems.

[nataz]

democracy = guaranteed mediocrity. Im rooting for coup dtat.

Thank god we don't have a true democracy. Democratic Republics for life.

If you don't vote, you're actively making things worse.

I am far from apathetic.  My government sickens

Not quite true. If you don't vote, you are essentially voting for the status quo. By not participating, you aren't changing anything, leaving the system as is. A non-vote/non-action essentially means that it's not bad enough to do anything to bring about change.

Move, vote, or fight. Else, get outta the way and stop the bitching.

- I have nothing against revolution, I save my ire for the the people who preach it.

- And for that matter, I have nothing against the apathetic, because as explained earlier, if it does get bad enough, they will do something about it. If they choose not to vote now, then it's really not that bad for them is it? JD doesn't complain, and he doesn't vote. Not a problem.

[Gandalf_The_White_1]

democracy = guaranteed mediocrity. Im rooting for coup dtat.

Thank god we don't have a true democracy. Democratic Republics for life.

If you don't vote, you're actively making things worse.

I am far from apathetic.  My government sickens

Not quite true. If you don't vote, you are essentially voting for the status quo. By not participating, you aren't changing anything, leaving the system as is. A non-vote/non-action essentially means that it's not bad enough to do anything to bring about change.

Move, vote, or fight. Else, get outta the way and stop the bitching.

- I have nothing against revolution, I save my ire for the the people who preach it.

- And for that matter, I have nothing against the apathetic, because as explained earlier, if it does get bad enough, they will do something about it. If they choose not to vote now, then it's really not that bad for them is it? JD doesn't complain, and he doesn't vote. Not a problem.

I have to disagree.  I think that the whole idea/concept of democracy is stupid.  There's so many things wrong with the system I don't even know where to start, and if anyone thinks that their vote is going to change anything I call that being fairly naive.  I'm Canadian, and the next election I get to vote in I'm spoiling my ballot in protest.

[Jacob Orlove]

Not quite true. If you don't vote, you are essentially voting for the status quo.

No, if you wanted to vote for the status quo, you'd, you know, actually vote for the status quo. By not voting, you're actively asking politicians to ignore you, and reducing the power of the electorate in favor of special interest groups. Even voting nothing but write-ins is better than not voting at all.

[Godder]

Democracy is the worst system in the world, except for all the other systems we've tried so far.

Also, I agree with ELD that some of the positions that are elected amazes me - you guys elect judges, which I think is bad times, since modern elections often involve things that have nothing to do with the position up for grabs.