If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   "The Case for Not Voting." Apparently it boils down to being too busy   (slate.com) divider line 474
    More: Asinine, Lena Dunham, false choice, Biden  
•       •       •

6655 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Oct 2012 at 12:29 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



474 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-26 01:58:25 PM

FlashHarry: what farking entitlement. when millions live under oppressive dictatorship around the world, to not exercise your sacred right of suffrage is just farking disgusting.


This same sentiment goes triple for people who try to get out of jury duty. Brag about it. Even discuss the best methods of subverting the process. Fark is full of them. If they are ever accused of a crime they should go to prison with the right to trial by jury.
 
2012-10-26 01:58:29 PM

Obbi: Happy Hours: If anyone wants to send a message that the choices suck they should turn in a blank ballot.

/will be voting.

That's...not a bad idea actually, can you actually do that?

//Doesn't vote, choices suck


All of them? Really? Are you so sure that you wouldn't want a Gary Johnson presidency that you can stay home?

That is what the Republican-Democratic Electoral Machine wants.
 
2012-10-26 02:00:55 PM

Millennium: God Is My Co-Pirate: If you don't vote, you simply have no right to complain about the government.

The First Amendment says otherwise, but in any event, I'm forced to wonder: would you paint active nonvoters ("I don't vote, and this is why") and passive nonvoters ("Meh; whatever") with the same brush?


I would. If only because most of these people later complain that the government isn't any good. Well, you get the government you voted for...or in this case, not.
 
2012-10-26 02:01:32 PM

IlGreven: Obbi: Happy Hours: If anyone wants to send a message that the choices suck they should turn in a blank ballot.

/will be voting.

That's...not a bad idea actually, can you actually do that?

//Doesn't vote, choices suck

All of them? Really? Are you so sure that you wouldn't want a Gary Johnson presidency that you can stay home?

That is what how the Republican-Democratic Electoral Machine wantsworks.


FTFY
 
2012-10-26 02:02:09 PM

IlGreven: Millennium: God Is My Co-Pirate: If you don't vote, you simply have no right to complain about the government.

The First Amendment says otherwise, but in any event, I'm forced to wonder: would you paint active nonvoters ("I don't vote, and this is why") and passive nonvoters ("Meh; whatever") with the same brush?

I would. If only because most of these people later complain that the government isn't any good. Well, you get the government you voted for...or in this case, not.


If you are an anti-capitalist what is the point of voting for capitalist candidates?
 
2012-10-26 02:02:23 PM

Honest Bender: GanjSmokr: I don't see how voting 3rd party would be "throwing away" your vote if you weren't going to vote anyway...

...seriously?
I outlined my three voting options: Corporate Whore #1, Corporate Whore #2, and 3rd party trashcan.
I don't vote for the reasons I stated in my previous post. But if I did vote, and voted for 3rd party, it would just be tossing my vote in the trash.


Yes, seriously... you left out the last line of my post:

Throw Gary Johnson a vote. If he gets 5%, things might be more interesting next time around.

Unless you like being limited to the choices of CW1 and CW2 (which it seems you don't), do something to initiate change. If Gary Johnson gets 5% of the vote this time, we could see some change next time around.
 
2012-10-26 02:03:12 PM

hugram: spidermilk: Hobo Jr.: Alabamian voting for Obama.

I might as well throw my vote away.

This is how I feel too, but I still feel good casting my democratic vote in a red state. I mean if other democrats see that there were some other democratic votes then it will keep them from giving up too.

Plus if solid red states start to win by less and less of a margin in future elections, then eventually the GOP is going to have to defend a once solid red state.

So go and vote, even if you know Obama is not going to win in Alabama or Texas, etc.


Not to mention, the more moderates stay home, the more the crazies get to determine the election, and the more they get courted by future politicians.
 
2012-10-26 02:04:20 PM

correct horse battery staple: offmymeds: Early voted yesterday. At least I'll have a right to complain if and/or when things go horribly wrong.

Amusingly, that's actually the opposite of how parliamentary procedures generally work. By voting, you are agreeing to the terms of the vote, ie that the issue will be settled by the majority. You've agreed to the rules of the game, even if you lose.

To reserve the right to complain or revisit the issue later, you either find proof that the rules weren't followed, or you abstain from voting by declining your ballot.

PS: Not voting is not the same thing as declining your ballot. It's indicating that you don't care enough to show up, even though you were informed well in advance.

PPS: Spoiling your ballot is not the same thing as declining your ballot. Declining it indicates that you find all of the options presented to be unacceptable or you otherwise reject the voting rules. Spoiling your ballot indicates that you don't know how to use a voting machine.


In the grown up world, pouting is usually unsuccessful. If you don't like the rules of the game, you have to play by the rules to change the rules. If instead you decide to go sit in the corner and cry, we'll just ignore you.
 
2012-10-26 02:04:47 PM

FarkedOver: IlGreven: Millennium: God Is My Co-Pirate: If you don't vote, you simply have no right to complain about the government.

The First Amendment says otherwise, but in any event, I'm forced to wonder: would you paint active nonvoters ("I don't vote, and this is why") and passive nonvoters ("Meh; whatever") with the same brush?

I would. If only because most of these people later complain that the government isn't any good. Well, you get the government you voted for...or in this case, not.

If you are an anti-capitalist what is the point of voting for capitalist candidates?


There are at least two Communist candidates on most ballots, if you want one.
 
2012-10-26 02:05:44 PM

midigod: correct horse battery staple: offmymeds: Early voted yesterday. At least I'll have a right to complain if and/or when things go horribly wrong.

Amusingly, that's actually the opposite of how parliamentary procedures generally work. By voting, you are agreeing to the terms of the vote, ie that the issue will be settled by the majority. You've agreed to the rules of the game, even if you lose.

You're not talking about the same thing. offmymeds wasn't talking about complaining that his guy won. He was talking about complaining if his guy didn't do the things he said he would, or was stymied by some other influences. So don't pretend you're arguing against him; you're arguing a completely different point.


In fairness, I think we're both making assumptions about what offmymeds actually meant, but I understand where you're coming from.
 
2012-10-26 02:05:57 PM

Honest Bender: GanjSmokr: I don't see how voting 3rd party would be "throwing away" your vote if you weren't going to vote anyway...

...seriously?
I outlined my three voting options: Corporate Whore #1, Corporate Whore #2, and 3rd party trashcan.
I don't vote for the reasons I stated in my previous post. But if I did vote, and voted for 3rd party, it would just be tossing my vote in the trash.


..,thank you for furthering the agenda of corporate whores. Probably more than those who actually vote for them.
 
2012-10-26 02:05:59 PM

midigod: insano: Also, protect rights from who? Other voters?

Protect those rights from being removed. For your own sake, please take a civics class.


So you avoid actually making a point and just attack my knowledge of civics...

When you say I need to vote to protect my rights from being removed, then you imply that there are other voters who want to take away my rights. Do they have the same 'responsibility' to vote to take away my rights? Are peoples' rights at odds with each other? No! But you knew that already Mr. civics professor.

Of course I don't expect you to actually defend your contention, only to call me ignorant again.
 
2012-10-26 02:06:11 PM

jigger: The My Little Pony Killer: You enjoy said privileges because of all the other people who get off their entitled, lazy asses and vote. There's no reason for you not to. Absolutely none, and you can biatch about "haranguing" by pro-voters all you want, we're the ones saving your stupid asses.

offmymeds: Early voted yesterday. At least I'll have a right to complain if and/or when things go horribly wrong.

How can you complain,offmymeds? According to The My Little Pony Killer, you voters are saving us all.


politicalgroove.com
 
2012-10-26 02:07:24 PM

The Case for Not Voting
By Kerry Howley
Posted Friday, Oct. 26, 2012


And there you have it.....Rehashed Story #12,345 for this election season by a journalist with nothing better to write about until after the polls close.

Next Up: The mysterious tie-in between the Electoral College, the popular vote being discounted and the Illuminati sponsored Cheesy Poofs. Coincidence? I think not.

Film at 11. 

And just think....on 11/7, we all will have a renewed set of reasons to hate each other for the next 4 years. I am so excited, and I just can't hide it, I'm about to lose control and I think I like it....
 
2012-10-26 02:07:57 PM

IlGreven: FarkedOver: IlGreven: Millennium: God Is My Co-Pirate: If you don't vote, you simply have no right to complain about the government.

The First Amendment says otherwise, but in any event, I'm forced to wonder: would you paint active nonvoters ("I don't vote, and this is why") and passive nonvoters ("Meh; whatever") with the same brush?

I would. If only because most of these people later complain that the government isn't any good. Well, you get the government you voted for...or in this case, not.

If you are an anti-capitalist what is the point of voting for capitalist candidates?

There are at least two Communist candidates on most ballots, if you want one.


Depends on which communist party. If it's a stalinist organization HELL NO! (CPUSA is a Stalinist organization but they have endorsed Obama). If it is the Sparts.... HELL NO! They approve of pedophilia.
 
2012-10-26 02:09:22 PM

midigod: Please reread my post. I said that the rights were enumerated, not the responsibilities. I'm sorry that you feel as though you have no responsibilities to this society other than those you'd face punishment for avoiding. Your attitude is all too common, and in its ignorance, proves my point.


Exactly, they are not enumerated by law, which means they are not responsibilities. I understand that you are attempting to derive responsibility from some higher abstract notion of duty to country or democracy, but that's not the way it works. I am no more obligated to vote than I am to pray to god.
 
2012-10-26 02:10:45 PM

m1ke: Who am I supposed to vote for? Am I supposed to vote for the republican who is going to blast me in the ass or the democrat who is blasting my ass? Politics is one big ass blast. I say we pull up our bootstraps, oil up a couple of asses and do a little plowing of our own.


There's a couple/few third party candidates.

If everyone that was disgusted like you are voted third party, we'd actually get enough votes (I think it's 5% popular vote) to get the federal funding.
 
2012-10-26 02:10:51 PM
When we get out of the stone age and switch to a popular vote I'll consider voting. Until then, it's not that I can't be bothered, I just don't see any reason to participate in the farce. And no, I don't mind the contempt and disdain of the voting nazis, I have plenty of both for them as well.
 
2012-10-26 02:12:25 PM

Honest Bender: GanjSmokr: I don't see how voting 3rd party would be "throwing away" your vote if you weren't going to vote anyway...

...seriously?
I outlined my three voting options: Corporate Whore #1, Corporate Whore #2, and 3rd party trashcan.
I don't vote for the reasons I stated in my previous post. But if I did vote, and voted for 3rd party, it would just be tossing my vote in the trash.


If you don't vote at all, you're still tossing it in the trash; same net. The difference being throwing it away on a 3rd party candidate can't be played off as laziness in the press when looking at turnout and results. It's the difference between, "I'll throw my vote away" and "I'll throw my vote away and remind you I think you're all corporate whores."
 
2012-10-26 02:12:53 PM

shkkmo: Tom_Slick: The other reason to vote, local elections, you my not like the presidential choices, but your vote could make the difference if your town has enough money to build a new school or repave that pothole strewn road you drive down every day and complain about.

I would vote in Local elections, but I've been itinerant for a while and I don't feel like I have a enough of a stake in any one community to have the right to vote on their issues. I'm currently in the processing of possibly settling down; maybe I'll vote local in the future.


If you pay any tax to your community, directly or indirectly, you have a stake in that community. That includes rent (your landlord passes property taxes on to you), sales tax and auto registration fees. You interact with cops -- do you prefer them good or bad?
 
2012-10-26 02:13:26 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------- - ----------
lennavan Smartest
Funniest
2012-10-26 02:04:20 PM


correct horse battery staple: offmymeds: Early voted yesterday. At least I'll have a right to complain if and/or when things go horribly wrong.

Amusingly, that's actually the opposite of how parliamentary procedures generally work. By voting, you are agreeing to the terms of the vote, ie that the issue will be settled by the majority. You've agreed to the rules of the game, even if you lose.

To reserve the right to complain or revisit the issue later, you either find proof that the rules weren't followed, or you abstain from voting by declining your ballot.

PS: Not voting is not the same thing as declining your ballot. It's indicating that you don't care enough to show up, even though you were informed well in advance.

PPS: Spoiling your ballot is not the same thing as declining your ballot. Declining it indicates that you find all of the options presented to be unacceptable or you otherwise reject the voting rules. Spoiling your ballot indicates that you don't know how to use a voting machine.

In the grown up world, pouting is usually unsuccessful. If you don't like the rules of the game, you have to play by the rules to change the rules




In a situation where a "game" is fixed, you don't decide the rules, and yet will suffer the same consequences as all, an intelligent person will simply refuse to play the game anymore.
 
2012-10-26 02:14:47 PM
If I didn't live in Ohio, I'd vote Green, I think. Since I do, though, I have to vote *against* Rmoney. It could get 1% tight this year, and I don't want to fark it up. I would encourage everyone not in a swing state to vote 3rd party, though.
 
2012-10-26 02:15:23 PM

lennavan: In the grown up world, pouting is usually unsuccessful. If you don't like the rules of the game, you have to play by the rules to change the rules. If instead you decide to go sit in the corner and cry, we'll just ignore you.


In an attempt to increase voter turnout, a popular mantra has been that if you do not participate in the electoral process, you do not have the right to complain about the outcome. I was amused by this as it is the opposite of how decision making through voting is framed by parliamentarians. I am aware that things are fundamentally different at federal and non-federal levels. Apparently I'm just easily amused.
 
2012-10-26 02:15:56 PM
The candidate i want, Gary Johnson (L), has been sued off the ballot by the Republicans in my state. So why would I waste my time voting when I refuse to vote for Obama or Romney, and can't vote for the candidate i want?
 
2012-10-26 02:16:00 PM
Not registered, not voting, never voted, not going to vote.

Until we have something that isn't a two party system, I am not going to bother with it. Neither party represents my interests, nor do any third parties.

Not all non-voters are lazy or stupid. I will keep complaining because there is a LOT wrong with this country that has nothing to do with Democratic or Republican politics.
 
2012-10-26 02:18:23 PM

FlashHarry: shiat like this just makes my blood farking boil. what farking arrogance. what farking laziness. what farking entitlement. when millions live under oppressive dictatorship around the world, to not exercise your sacred right of suffrage is just farking disgusting.


I tried this on the wife and let her know that there were plenty of women out there that had no man to feed and keep them warm at night. Apparently, 'there are starving kids in africa' type of logic does not work in many instances.
 
2012-10-26 02:18:56 PM
Found this article to be funny.

Link

Should be headlined: Florida and Ohio. Tell us what it's like to live in a democratic society.
 
2012-10-26 02:19:09 PM

SweetSaws: The candidate i want, Gary Johnson (L), has been sued off the ballot by the Republicans in my state. So why would I waste my time voting when I refuse to vote for Obama or Romney, and can't vote for the candidate i want?


Which state is that? Last I checked, Gary Johnson was on 48 state ballots with OK having nobody but O/R (with no write ins) and MI allows a write in of GJ.
 
2012-10-26 02:19:09 PM
why would a rich person like Katy Perry vote Democrat? once your rich you're supposed to vote Republican. she probably is having trouble paying her bills.
 
2012-10-26 02:21:14 PM

Beerbarian: Pharmdawg: I think many more people would vote if there was a "none of the above" option, even if there is only an incumbent listed.

Or "anyone else". If you want to make a statement, get 1000 friends together and vote against every incumbent. May not help, but the parties do track the trending numbers of the incumbents they run for each office.


Apparently, Nevada actually does that: Link
 
2012-10-26 02:24:36 PM

insano: When you say I need to vote to protect my rights from being removed, then you imply that there are other voters who want to take away my rights.


Don't be silly, it's the politicians who want to take away your rights.
 
2012-10-26 02:25:54 PM

ZeroCorpse: Doug


"It is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it... anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."

--Douglas Adams
 
2012-10-26 02:25:59 PM

doubled99: --------------------------------------------------------------------- - ----------
lennavan Smartest
Funniest
2012-10-26 02:04:20 PM


correct horse battery staple: offmymeds: Early voted yesterday. At least I'll have a right to complain if and/or when things go horribly wrong.

Amusingly, that's actually the opposite of how parliamentary procedures generally work. By voting, you are agreeing to the terms of the vote, ie that the issue will be settled by the majority. You've agreed to the rules of the game, even if you lose.

To reserve the right to complain or revisit the issue later, you either find proof that the rules weren't followed, or you abstain from voting by declining your ballot.

PS: Not voting is not the same thing as declining your ballot. It's indicating that you don't care enough to show up, even though you were informed well in advance.

PPS: Spoiling your ballot is not the same thing as declining your ballot. Declining it indicates that you find all of the options presented to be unacceptable or you otherwise reject the voting rules. Spoiling your ballot indicates that you don't know how to use a voting machine.

In the grown up world, pouting is usually unsuccessful. If you don't like the rules of the game, you have to play by the rules to change the rules



In a situation where a "game" is fixed, you don't decide the rules, and yet will suffer the same consequences as all, an intelligent person will simply refuse to play the game anymore.


I have no issue with someone who decides to leave the country.
 
2012-10-26 02:27:38 PM

dcigary: ZeroCorpse: Doug

"It is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it... anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."

--Douglas Adams


that's why President Barack Hussein Obama was annointed at Birth with Presidential Serum
8 mg for 8 whole years
 
2012-10-26 02:28:17 PM

insano: When you say I need to vote to protect my rights from being removed, then you imply that there are other voters who want to take away my rights.


I imply no such thing. There are many other players who would love to take away your right to vote, and in fact, they've already begun in a couple of states, by trying to pass legislation that would make many local offices by appointment instead of by ballot. A weak democracy is always in danger from the outside, as well as from within. In fact there are many who would say that the two-party system intensifies that danger, since there are so few choices, and the result of such an election may be that one of the candidates chips away at the rights of the citizenry, hopefully without anyone objecting. But wait - that already happens EVERY DAY. It's only because of watchdogs publicizing these moves, and a concerned electorate reacting, that they do not take over and erode our rights. Please don't tell me you don't see those things happening, because they do, at all levels of government.

Of course I don't expect you to actually defend your contention, only to call me ignorant again.

Sorry to disappoint you on both counts, but yes, you do appear ignorant.

derive responsibility from some higher abstract notion of duty to country or democracy, but that's not the way it works.

Actually, yes, that was precisely the way our Founding Fathers intended it to work. That you choose to ignore what their vision was is another indication that you need more education. You cannot simply deny that something happened, and then live in that constructed society as if it didn't. It did happen. It was intended that way. I could give you quotes, but I'd prefer to have you look them up. Please believe me, they are there.
 
2012-10-26 02:31:22 PM

ProfessorOhki: If you don't vote at all, you're still tossing it in the trash; same net.


Yes. That's exactly the point I was trying to make. That the difference between voting and not voting is the same as leaving a piece of trash in the trash can vs. picking it up and selecting a different trash can to put it in.

But apparently I have a civic duty to select which trash can my trash should be put into. Regardless of the fact that it's all going to the landfill.
 
2012-10-26 02:32:25 PM

GanjSmokr: moefuggenbrew: Hey, who do I vote for if I want legal weed?

If you're serious, you should do research on it.

I'll give you a hint who NOT to vote for it you want legal weed, Romney/Obama.


Roseanne Barr (Yes, THAT Roseanne Barr *from TV* ) is on the list of presidential candidates this time around and I know she is for legalizing weed. So far thats the only one I know of.
 
2012-10-26 02:32:44 PM
Alabamian voting for Obama.

I might as well throw my vote away.


AK here and in the same situation. I consider my presidential vote to be a big FU to the right wing nuts. Doesn't do anything, but makes me feel better. (local races still matter)


They say, 'If you don't vote, you have no right to complain,' but where's the logic in that? If you vote, and you elect dishonest, incompetent politicians, and they get into office and screw everything up, you are responsible for what they have done. You voted them in. You caused the problem. You have no right to complain. I, on the other hand, who did not vote - who did not even leave the house on Election Day - am in no way responsible for what these politicians have done and have every right to complain about the mess that you created." - George Carlin

I like Carlin, unfortunately he has a logic problem here. Elections are the ONLY time when your political opinion can be taken seriously by those in office. By not voting you ARE responsible for who gets in because you could have cast your vote to stop them. If the big two are not to your liking, you could have let it be known by voting 3rd party. Politicians see the numbers and percents as a gauge on how well people like what they are doing. If they lose a significant number to third party they may rethink their platforms or hold back their more extreme positions. If they get a landslide (because people who disagreed stayed home) they'll enact the more extreme measures and feel that they are doing what people want. By not voting, you are telling politicians that they don't have to consider your opinion at all. By voting (even third party) you tell them that you are politically active and COULD support them at some future time if they change what they support.

I don't vote for the reasons I stated in my previous post. But if I did vote, and voted for 3rd party, it would just be tossing my vote in the trash.

No it isn't. It expresses a discontent. Not voting expresses indifference. One says "Hey, I don't like what you are doing" and the other says "You're fine, just doe whatever". While 1 person's discontent is not going to change things, If everyone who was discontent voted 3rd party, you'd scare the socks of the established parties.
 
2012-10-26 02:33:22 PM

Jacobin: Early voted two days ago. Not in a swing state, so it wasn't very satisfying.


If things keep going the way thay have been, by Election Day the only non-swing states will be red ones...
 
2012-10-26 02:33:23 PM
In a situation where a "game" is fixed, you don't decide the rules, and yet will suffer the same consequences as all, an intelligent person will simply refuse to play the game anymore.

I have no issue with someone who decides to leave the country




Don't use analogies if you are incapable of understanding them.
 
2012-10-26 02:34:37 PM
Well, it looks like I will not be voting this year, because I will have job interviews on the west coast, and it's really late for an absentee ballot.

/Was trying to work the election, but when it screws up 3 days right in the middle of "on-site season", that is just not happening.
//Really hope the city isn't too screwed by my dropping out so late.
///Seriously, if anyone in the Farmington government is reading this, I really, really apologize. i got an offer with a deadline of November 16th, and so I'm moving the entire week of Thanksgiving into the 3 days around election day.
 
2012-10-26 02:34:40 PM

Honest Bender: Yes. That's exactly the point I was trying to make. That the difference between voting and not voting is the same as leaving a piece of trash in the trash can vs. picking it up and selecting a different trash can to put it in.


Good analogy. The difference between voting and not voting is the same as leaving an aluminum can in the trash can versus picking up the aluminum can and selecting a different trash can, say perhaps the recycling trash can, to put it in. Because as it turns out, while both your recycling trash can and trash can are similar, they're not equal.
 
2012-10-26 02:35:46 PM

doubled99: Nightsweat Smartest
Funniest
2012-10-26 01:39:33 PM


doubled99: offmymeds Smartest
Funniest
2012-10-26 01:06:53 PM


doubled99: offmymeds Smartest
Funniest
2012-10-26 12:44:58 PM


Early voted yesterday. At least I'll have a right to complain if and/or when things go horribly wrong.



Well, I guess that's the important thing.

No, the important thing is that I exercised my right to vote.



Words, Empty words. No, the only important thing is you can puff yourself up by saying so afterwards and pretend you did something important.

And you can't even pretend.

Don't need to. But thanks for acknowledging the importance of casting that vote. So you can say stuff later and feel good.


I'm sorry, I can't hear you. And neither can anyone else.
 
2012-10-26 02:35:54 PM
I was planning to vote, but now I'm seriously considering Tom Hanks' offer.
 
2012-10-26 02:35:55 PM

GanjSmokr: Throw Gary Johnson a vote. If he gets 5%, things might be more interesting next time around.

Unless you like being limited to the choices of CW1 and CW2 (which it seems you don't), do something to initiate change. If Gary Johnson gets 5% of the vote this time, we could see some change next time around.


I've just GOT to ask... what's your logic behind this? That if Random Dude gets a paltry number of votes, somehow it'll shake up the whole corrupt system?

IlGreven: ..,thank you for furthering the agenda of corporate whores. Probably more than those who actually vote for them.


I know, right? I mean, I could help to elect the next corporate shill or I could vote for someone who has ZERO chance of being elected. Surely that is somehow better than just abstaining... Tell me, how is my voting (vs. not voting) going to stick it to the corrupt political system?
 
2012-10-26 02:38:06 PM

Kittahinaborx: GanjSmokr: moefuggenbrew: Hey, who do I vote for if I want legal weed?

If you're serious, you should do research on it.

I'll give you a hint who NOT to vote for it you want legal weed, Romney/Obama.

Roseanne Barr (Yes, THAT Roseanne Barr *from TV* ) is on the list of presidential candidates this time around and I know she is for legalizing weed. So far thats the only one I know of.


who's she running with MC Hammer??
 
2012-10-26 02:38:28 PM

lennavan: directly addressing the number one reason for bankruptcy,


Really? Uninsured people were the number one reason for bankruptcy?

Maybe you can show us a link to a webpage that backs up this assertion.
 
2012-10-26 02:38:51 PM

Honest Bender: ProfessorOhki: If you don't vote at all, you're still tossing it in the trash; same net.

Yes. That's exactly the point I was trying to make. That the difference between voting and not voting is the same as leaving a piece of trash in the trash can vs. picking it up and selecting a different trash can to put it in.

But apparently I have a civic duty to select which trash can my trash should be put into. Regardless of the fact that it's all going to the landfill.


You keep leaving out / ignoring / dismissing the fact that if Gary Johnson gets enough "throw away" votes, it changes the game next presidential election. It's NOT the same trash can. In the Gary Johnson trash can, there's a chance it's going to make some change.  There's a chance you might actually get a "choice" next presidential election if enough of us do this.
 
2012-10-26 02:40:03 PM
Done in one, honestly. The very idea that there is, somehow, a case for not voting is ludicrous. Without a vote, you have no true representation - even "conscientious objection" to the railed electoral process is pointless unless you add your nudge to the electoral shove needed to change the direction of that juggernaut.
 
2012-10-26 02:40:14 PM

lennavan: Good analogy. The difference between voting and not voting is the same as leaving an aluminum can in the trash can versus picking up the aluminum can and selecting a different trash can, say perhaps the recycling trash can, to put it in. Because as it turns out, while both your recycling trash can and trash can are similar, they're not equal.


Really? Because if you pay close attention, you'll notice that the garbage truck pulls up, dumps all the containers in the back of his truck, and drives it to the landfill where it's all dumped into the same shiathole.
 
Displayed 50 of 474 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report