• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 23:47
CEST 05:47
KST 12:47
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Maestros of the Game: Week 1/Play-in Preview9[ASL20] Ro24 Preview Pt2: Take-Off7[ASL20] Ro24 Preview Pt1: Runway132v2 & SC: Evo Complete: Weekend Double Feature4Team Liquid Map Contest #21 - Presented by Monster Energy10
Community News
Weekly Cups (August 25-31): Clem's Last Straw?32Weekly Cups (Aug 18-24): herO dethrones MaxPax6Maestros of The Game—$20k event w/ live finals in Paris46Weekly Cups (Aug 11-17): MaxPax triples again!15Weekly Cups (Aug 4-10): MaxPax wins a triple6
StarCraft 2
General
Geoff 'iNcontroL' Robinson has passed away Team Liquid Map Contest #21 - Presented by Monster Energy Heaven's Balance Suggestions (roast me) Speculation of future Wardii series Weekly Cups (August 25-31): Clem's Last Straw?
Tourneys
LiuLi Cup - September 2025 Tournaments Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Maestros of The Game—$20k event w/ live finals in Paris Monday Nights Weeklies
Strategy
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 489 Bannable Offense Mutation # 488 What Goes Around Mutation # 487 Think Fast Mutation # 486 Watch the Skies
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Simple editing of Brood War save files? (.mlx) ASL20 General Discussion Starcraft at lower levels TvP BW General Discussion
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues Is there English video for group selection for ASL [ASL20] Ro24 Group F [IPSL] CSLAN Review and CSLPRO Reimagined!
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Muta micro map competition Fighting Spirit mining rates [G] Mineral Boosting
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread General RTS Discussion Thread Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne Nintendo Switch Thread Mechabellum
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Canadian Politics Mega-thread YouTube Thread
Fan Clubs
The Happy Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread High temperatures on bridge(s) Gtx660 graphics card replacement
TL Community
The Automated Ban List TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale
Blogs
A very expensive lesson on ma…
Garnet
hello world
radishsoup
Lemme tell you a thing o…
JoinTheRain
How Culture and Conflict Imp…
TrAiDoS
RTS Design in Hypercoven
a11
Evil Gacha Games and the…
ffswowsucks
INDEPENDIENTE LA CTM
XenOsky
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 625 users

Go Vote - Page 4

Blogs > itsjustatank
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 Next All
KING CHARLIE :D
Profile Blog Joined March 2012
United States447 Posts
November 05 2012 22:31 GMT
#61
My church group and I will be driving our off-white disheveled church bus down to the voting booths tomorrow, and along the way, picking up homeless men, transients, nomads and other people malleable enough to be influenced by fifty bucks, a crack rock or just the free cookies and juice provided to every voter. Over the last several months, we've spent every church service on Sunday and Wednesday scouring the King James bible for names that we can use to apply for absentee ballots. I can only hope our conviction was enough to keep the checks coming every month. Obama 2012
NO TEAM WILL EVER BE AS GOOD AS TEAM LIQUID!
Jerubaal
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States7684 Posts
November 05 2012 22:48 GMT
#62
On November 06 2012 07:20 bkrow wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 06 2012 06:53 Jerubaal wrote:
On November 06 2012 06:16 itsjustatank wrote:
On November 06 2012 06:14 Jerubaal wrote:
On November 06 2012 06:01 itsjustatank wrote:
On November 06 2012 05:52 Jerubaal wrote:
On November 06 2012 05:36 itsjustatank wrote:
On November 06 2012 05:19 Jerubaal wrote:
The low voter turnout in the United States can be explained almost entirely on two factors. 1. Institutional: Non compulsory voting. No election holiday. Different voting days for various elections. Voting registration. 2. Periods of "social cleavage events", i.e. voting blocs are formed by events causing social cleavage like depressions, wars, etc. The 1940s Great Depression was the last clear cut social cleavage event. You could call the 1960s a mini one but only for the Democrats and since then we've been starting and stopping and trying to figure out where the parties are headed. Basically, social cleavage events increase political participation and then it winds down again until the next major event. We've been stop and go for a while, so who knows what will happen this election. I predict it will be down a bit from last time but still higher than the decade average before.


I'm focusing mainly on people who actively refuse to vote. They could vote but choose not to, usually because of a political reason, apathy, or straight-up ignorance. I agree that many of the things you listed above would help drive turnout substantially.

As for cleavage event, this recent economic crisis might turn out to be one.


There are two types of people who don't vote. People who are disengaged from the political process and people who claim to have "principled disgust". The former are vastly in the majority. I don't think I want those people voting. I don't even know if there's a way to forcefeed these people information. The second group is largely imaginary and where they actually exist exist largely in academia.



Would you say frictional unemployment doesn't exist as well? There isn't much data on the motives for people who do not vote so political scientists just ignore them or argue that institutional shifts will account for them. I disagree with this approach. It assumes those 80 million or so people don't actually have an opinion either way and would never express their preferences.

It may be idealistic, but I'd like to see what might happen if they ended up voting.


Disagree. Like I said, the evidence is that people who don't vote are disengaged from politics. The sprinkling of people who make a rational decision to not vote are an aberration. I don't consider the C- slackers who think they know shit but don't as part of the "principled disgust" crowd.


I do. Your approach assumes they will always remain uninformed and are better off not being part of the franchise in the first place.


It's a chicken before the egg question. Are they uninformed because they don't vote or do they not vote because they are uninformed? Nobody's stopping anyone from becoming more engaged but I question if hand-holding is helpful.

On November 06 2012 06:34 CoR wrote:
not really getting the american system
getting 50,01% in one state and get ALL votes form the state is so 1800ish xD ^^

also only have 2 parties and have a direct voting candidat ^^ remembers me to german president elections between 1920-1940 ^^

ps: americans plz do the rest of the world and YOU a good thing and vote obama, if you vote romney ,,, no country in the world will take americans serious the next years ^^ you not wanna be laughts in every of your outlandish holidays want you ? xD

"i dont care 47% of the people anyway" -> "mehhh i am surely the 53%" ^^


1800ish? Sounds like a compliment as the average length of a form of government for Europe is ~50 years. Doubly ironic is that the German system basically takes all the good parts of the U.S. system and improves upon them.
-A more robust form of federalism
-A powerful but limited high court with a defined role.
Not surprising considering the U.S. helped you write it. By the way, no other country in the world has any popular input on presidential candidates or executives. Every other country has theirs chosen by their parties. So lol?

So what's the rationale for the Electoral College? And don't just say "to protect the smaller states" because instead of the "big" states being important, it is just shifted to the "swing" states. Seems like the same problem to me?


The presidential election is not meant to be wholly democratic. The representative branch is wholly democratic. The electoral college is there to prevent tyranny of the majority, to put just one more hurdle in the way of dictatorship. Yes, there's an element of randomness and clunkiness and that's by design.
I'm not stupid, a marauder just shot my brain.
Jerubaal
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States7684 Posts
November 05 2012 22:49 GMT
#63
On November 06 2012 07:31 KING CHARLIE :D wrote:
My church group and I will be driving our off-white disheveled church bus down to the voting booths tomorrow, and along the way, picking up homeless men, transients, nomads and other people malleable enough to be influenced by fifty bucks, a crack rock or just the free cookies and juice provided to every voter. Over the last several months, we've spent every church service on Sunday and Wednesday scouring the King James bible for names that we can use to apply for absentee ballots. I can only hope our conviction was enough to keep the checks coming every month. Obama 2012


What were those names ACORN was using? Donald Duck and Chester Cheeto?
I'm not stupid, a marauder just shot my brain.
Phailol
Profile Blog Joined July 2011
United States84 Posts
November 05 2012 22:53 GMT
#64
Thank god I'm leaving this shit hole of a country as soon as I am able. I'm tired of the same bullshit politicians feed all the time and nearly every single monkey on this forum is gulliable(sp?) enough believe in their word. I can't wait until this whole system falls apart and the entire country goes into chaos, and all because of the idiot masses listening to big wigs looking like they know what they're talking about.

(The only reason I'm so heated about this is as stated in a previous post, I hate politics, all politicians are crooks. Name one that isn't in some way. Just one. And for the record, I do live in CA, so my vote is shit anyway)
With every great victory, many failures preceded it.
itsjustatank
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
Hong Kong9154 Posts
November 05 2012 22:56 GMT
#65
On November 06 2012 07:53 Phailol wrote:
Thank god I'm leaving this shit hole of a country as soon as I am able. I'm tired of the same bullshit politicians feed all the time and nearly every single monkey on this forum is gulliable(sp?) enough believe in their word. I can't wait until this whole system falls apart and the entire country goes into chaos, and all because of the idiot masses listening to big wigs looking like they know what they're talking about.

(The only reason I'm so heated about this is as stated in a previous post, I hate politics, all politicians are crooks. Name one that isn't in some way. Just one. And for the record, I do live in CA, so my vote is shit anyway)


I guess leaving the country entirely is radical enough of a political position to take, rofl.
Photographer"nosotros estamos backamos" - setsuko
Epishade
Profile Blog Joined November 2011
United States2267 Posts
November 05 2012 23:03 GMT
#66
I voted last week against my will lol. My parents forced me to vote republican with them, even though I dislike both candidates. Granted, I'm sure that I am not as informed as most people here, but I have gripes with the whole voting process. Popular vote should be the way to pick president, not this whole electoral college crap that lumps up a lot of popular votes into 1 electoral vote. I mean, as a nation, shouldn't WE (the majority) decide our president, and not our representatives?

On November 06 2012 04:18 docvoc wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 06 2012 04:10 itsjustatank wrote:
On November 06 2012 04:07 ninazerg wrote:
What if, say, I happened to be a Republican in a state which votes overwhelmingly Democratic, or vice-versa? Even if I was like "Romney, fuck yeah!" and totally ignorant about the electoral college, my state would be won by Barack Obama regardless.

Also, why should I be pressured into voting if, as an American, I have the personal freedom to abstain from voting if I feel that neither candidate is qualified for holding public office?


You do realize there are other things to vote on in an election season than that for highest office? A lot of those things will fundamentally affect you much more than whoever might end up being elected president (mayorships, initiatives and referendum, etc). You do have the freedom not to choose, I'm just trying to educate people as to why not choosing is a bad strategy if you are uncomfortable with the status quo.

This. A lot of people forget that other offices are up for voting, and these offices matter a lot more than the presidency for most.

Though this is true that people forget about the other offices, I feel that almost none of the voters are informed enough to make such a decision. Almost nobody takes the time to research who they are going to vote for for people other than the president. Either that or they vote straight republican or straight democrat. Hell, I didn't know anybody I was voting for besides Obama and Romney. The only thing that made me change my mind about 1 judge was this guy standing outside the voting line telling us to vote for someone. He was a nice enough guy so I did vote for whomever he was praising, regardless of my not knowing anything about anyone.

If your name happens to come first on the ballot, congrats - you have a significant advantage over your competitors.
Pinhead Larry in the streets, Dirty Dan in the sheets.
overt
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States9006 Posts
November 05 2012 23:25 GMT
#67
On November 06 2012 08:03 Epishade wrote:
I voted last week against my will lol. My parents forced me to vote republican with them, even though I dislike both candidates.


They didn't force you to vote Republican. You can vote for whoever you want once you're in the booth by yourself. It's not like your parents walked in and held your hand through the whole process. You could've voted for anyone on the ballot and they'd be none the wiser lol.
sc2superfan101
Profile Blog Joined February 2012
3583 Posts
November 05 2012 23:57 GMT
#68
NO! do not go out and vote! only vote if you pay a LOT of attention, otherwise your vote is worse than worthless!
My fake plants died because I did not pretend to water them.
opisska
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
Poland8852 Posts
November 06 2012 00:02 GMT
#69
Funny how you consider 60 % to be a low turnout. At the all time low in 2002 we had election to the senate (the upper chamber of the parliament, it's power is basically only trying to veto laws, can be overruled by the lower chamber with a substantial majority, happens all the time) with turnout of 24 %. Literatly three out of four people went out of fucks that day.

So I consider the voting culture in the US quite good. I think it has a lot to do with a long history of democracy (mind you, we have had anything resembling a democracy only between 1918 to 1938 and from 1989 on - none of the elections between 1945 and 1989 were neither free nor fair).
"Jeez, that's far from ideal." - Serral, the king of mild trashtalk
TL+ Member
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18831 Posts
November 06 2012 00:15 GMT
#70
I love this blog and have little worth adding that hasn't already been said. Go vote
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
Silentness
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
United States2821 Posts
November 06 2012 00:26 GMT
#71
I'd vote, but I already know that Romney will win Texas. I have nothing against Obama, but I don't want to get raped on capital gain taxes (Isn't he the one against it?)
GL HF... YOLO..lololollol.
sc2superfan101
Profile Blog Joined February 2012
3583 Posts
November 06 2012 00:28 GMT
#72
On November 06 2012 09:26 Silentness wrote:
I'd vote, but I already know that Romney will win Texas. I have nothing against Obama, but I don't want to get raped on capital gain taxes (Isn't he the one against it?)

vote on your Congressional representative, your Senator, your city and county officials, and your school boards.

people who vote only for federal elections should just not vote ever, even if they are in a swing state.
My fake plants died because I did not pretend to water them.
Funnytoss
Profile Blog Joined August 2007
Taiwan1471 Posts
November 06 2012 00:32 GMT
#73
I voted absentee. VOTE!

So long as young people (which is most of TL) continue our apathy towards voting, expect our politicians to continue ignoring us. I mean, even if they have proposals and initiatives that can help us out, it doesn't help them get elected, so why bother? I mean, look at how solidly entrenched Medicare is, compared to say, student loan programs. Old people vote, and politicians are careful not to fuck with them.
AIV_Funnytoss and sGs.Funnytoss on iCCup
Praetorial
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
United States4241 Posts
November 06 2012 00:37 GMT
#74
On November 06 2012 07:31 KING CHARLIE :D wrote:
My church group and I will be driving our off-white disheveled church bus down to the voting booths tomorrow, and along the way, picking up homeless men, transients, nomads and other people malleable enough to be influenced by fifty bucks, a crack rock or just the free cookies and juice provided to every voter. Over the last several months, we've spent every church service on Sunday and Wednesday scouring the King James bible for names that we can use to apply for absentee ballots. I can only hope our conviction was enough to keep the checks coming every month. Obama 2012


LOL Charlie

I can't vote, unfortunately. I've convinced both of my parents who and what to vote for, though.

Ballot questions are tough.
FOR GREAT JUSTICE! Bans for the ban gods!
Daigomi
Profile Blog Joined May 2006
South Africa4316 Posts
November 06 2012 00:48 GMT
#75
Just an ignorant question from an foreigner: What are the exact benefits of having the typical absentee voters vote?

To me, it seems like, unless the preferences of the non-voting population differs significantly from those of the voting population, a sample size of 100m should be more than enough to get an accurate answer. Even if we assume that the non-voting population differs significantly from the voting population (a fairly big assumption), it still doesn't mean that it's a bad thing for them not to vote. In economics there's the idea that a free market allows the distribution of goods to consumers who place the highest value on those goods. Voting seems to be the same. Citizens who place the highest value on elections (and are thus the most likely to vote) get to have a greater say than those who don't value elections (and thus are unlikely to vote). As someone mentioned earlier, this should result in the more informed citizenry voting, ultimately resulting in better decisions being made.

The only situation in which I can personally see the benefit of having the non-voters vote is if there is some systematic factor dissuading a specific population group from voting. For example, before Obama it was possible that a large number of black Americans believed that none of the presidents would support them, resulting in a significant portion of the population not being represented (this is just an example, I have no idea if it black Americans really felt this way). However, as with the systematic bias, this is a very big assumption to make without having strong evidence supporting it. It also won't be fixed by motivating the average American to go vote.

So I guess my question remains: What is the benefit of non-voters voting, and why is it important to get these voters to vote?
Moderator
itsjustatank
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
Hong Kong9154 Posts
November 06 2012 01:13 GMT
#76
On November 06 2012 09:48 Daigomi wrote:
Just an ignorant question from an foreigner: What are the exact benefits of having the typical absentee voters vote?

To me, it seems like, unless the preferences of the non-voting population differs significantly from those of the voting population, a sample size of 100m should be more than enough to get an accurate answer. Even if we assume that the non-voting population differs significantly from the voting population (a fairly big assumption), it still doesn't mean that it's a bad thing for them not to vote. In economics there's the idea that a free market allows the distribution of goods to consumers who place the highest value on those goods. Voting seems to be the same. Citizens who place the highest value on elections (and are thus the most likely to vote) get to have a greater say than those who don't value elections (and thus are unlikely to vote). As someone mentioned earlier, this should result in the more informed citizenry voting, ultimately resulting in better decisions being made.

The only situation in which I can personally see the benefit of having the non-voters vote is if there is some systematic factor dissuading a specific population group from voting. For example, before Obama it was possible that a large number of black Americans believed that none of the presidents would support them, resulting in a significant portion of the population not being represented (this is just an example, I have no idea if it black Americans really felt this way). However, as with the systematic bias, this is a very big assumption to make without having strong evidence supporting it. It also won't be fixed by motivating the average American to go vote.

So I guess my question remains: What is the benefit of non-voters voting, and why is it important to get these voters to vote?


First you have to distinguish between absentee voting (which is voting by mail) and not voting. The greatest structural factor dissuading voting is the promotion in the political culture of the United States of keeping turnout low. It is to the advantage of the existing dominant political parties to attempt to reduce the turnout of supporters of the other side, as well as convince the large majority of people who don't vote to continue to do exactly that.

The point is that there is a huge proportion of the voting-eligible population in this country who do not vote, and if they had voted, the results from elections could potentially be drastically different. They end up not voting because the 'market' of voting explicitly prices them out of participating in the economy on purpose. Looking at the current system, with a small minority of people deciding elections in this country, and saying it is indicative of a normal distribution or otherwise okay isn't the way to go, because low turnout is indicative of market failure.
Photographer"nosotros estamos backamos" - setsuko
sc2superfan101
Profile Blog Joined February 2012
3583 Posts
November 06 2012 01:20 GMT
#77
On November 06 2012 10:13 itsjustatank wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 06 2012 09:48 Daigomi wrote:
Just an ignorant question from an foreigner: What are the exact benefits of having the typical absentee voters vote?

To me, it seems like, unless the preferences of the non-voting population differs significantly from those of the voting population, a sample size of 100m should be more than enough to get an accurate answer. Even if we assume that the non-voting population differs significantly from the voting population (a fairly big assumption), it still doesn't mean that it's a bad thing for them not to vote. In economics there's the idea that a free market allows the distribution of goods to consumers who place the highest value on those goods. Voting seems to be the same. Citizens who place the highest value on elections (and are thus the most likely to vote) get to have a greater say than those who don't value elections (and thus are unlikely to vote). As someone mentioned earlier, this should result in the more informed citizenry voting, ultimately resulting in better decisions being made.

The only situation in which I can personally see the benefit of having the non-voters vote is if there is some systematic factor dissuading a specific population group from voting. For example, before Obama it was possible that a large number of black Americans believed that none of the presidents would support them, resulting in a significant portion of the population not being represented (this is just an example, I have no idea if it black Americans really felt this way). However, as with the systematic bias, this is a very big assumption to make without having strong evidence supporting it. It also won't be fixed by motivating the average American to go vote.

So I guess my question remains: What is the benefit of non-voters voting, and why is it important to get these voters to vote?


First you have to distinguish between absentee voting (which is voting by mail) and not voting. The greatest structural factor dissuading voting is the promotion in the political culture of the United States of keeping turnout low. It is to the advantage of the existing dominant political parties to attempt to reduce the turnout of supporters of the other side, as well as convince the large majority of people who don't vote to continue to do exactly that.

The point is that there is a huge proportion of the voting-eligible population in this country who do not vote, and if they had voted, the results from elections could potentially be drastically different. They end up not voting because the 'market' of voting explicitly prices them out of participating in the economy on purpose. Looking at the current system, with a small minority of people deciding elections in this country, and saying it is indicative of a normal distribution or otherwise okay isn't the way to go, because low turnout is indicative of market failure.

huh? why are you discounting the fact that some of them may not vote because for some of them the vote is not important enough to waste time and money on?

further, how is a "low" turnout indicative of a market failure? especially when the purpose of voting is not simply to fill out and cast a ballot, but to elect effective leaders.
My fake plants died because I did not pretend to water them.
itsjustatank
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
Hong Kong9154 Posts
November 06 2012 01:29 GMT
#78
On November 06 2012 10:20 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 06 2012 10:13 itsjustatank wrote:
On November 06 2012 09:48 Daigomi wrote:
Just an ignorant question from an foreigner: What are the exact benefits of having the typical absentee voters vote?

To me, it seems like, unless the preferences of the non-voting population differs significantly from those of the voting population, a sample size of 100m should be more than enough to get an accurate answer. Even if we assume that the non-voting population differs significantly from the voting population (a fairly big assumption), it still doesn't mean that it's a bad thing for them not to vote. In economics there's the idea that a free market allows the distribution of goods to consumers who place the highest value on those goods. Voting seems to be the same. Citizens who place the highest value on elections (and are thus the most likely to vote) get to have a greater say than those who don't value elections (and thus are unlikely to vote). As someone mentioned earlier, this should result in the more informed citizenry voting, ultimately resulting in better decisions being made.

The only situation in which I can personally see the benefit of having the non-voters vote is if there is some systematic factor dissuading a specific population group from voting. For example, before Obama it was possible that a large number of black Americans believed that none of the presidents would support them, resulting in a significant portion of the population not being represented (this is just an example, I have no idea if it black Americans really felt this way). However, as with the systematic bias, this is a very big assumption to make without having strong evidence supporting it. It also won't be fixed by motivating the average American to go vote.

So I guess my question remains: What is the benefit of non-voters voting, and why is it important to get these voters to vote?


First you have to distinguish between absentee voting (which is voting by mail) and not voting. The greatest structural factor dissuading voting is the promotion in the political culture of the United States of keeping turnout low. It is to the advantage of the existing dominant political parties to attempt to reduce the turnout of supporters of the other side, as well as convince the large majority of people who don't vote to continue to do exactly that.

The point is that there is a huge proportion of the voting-eligible population in this country who do not vote, and if they had voted, the results from elections could potentially be drastically different. They end up not voting because the 'market' of voting explicitly prices them out of participating in the economy on purpose. Looking at the current system, with a small minority of people deciding elections in this country, and saying it is indicative of a normal distribution or otherwise okay isn't the way to go, because low turnout is indicative of market failure.

huh? why are you discounting the fact that some of them may not vote because for some of them the vote is not important enough to waste time and money on?

further, how is a "low" turnout indicative of a market failure? especially when the purpose of voting is not simply to fill out and cast a ballot, but to elect effective leaders.


Absentee voting renders your first point moot. Filling out a ballot by mail (or getting it early and turning it in early) 'wastes' no time at all, except for the effort of becoming educated. I would agree that things like declaring Election Day a federal holiday or requiring paid leave for people who want to go out and vote on that day would be useful in driving turnout if that is what you are getting at.

Whether or not the leaders the minority picks are 'effective' can be left up for heated argument. I will say that allowing a minority to pick and leaving a sizable number of people out in the cold is not a fair way of electing leaders. In addition, because elections are more than just about who gets to be the next President of the United States, failing to exercise a sovereign vote in other offices and positions can affect a non-voter even more than if whoever wins the office of the Presidency isn't their first choice.
Photographer"nosotros estamos backamos" - setsuko
Antylamon
Profile Joined March 2011
United States1981 Posts
November 06 2012 01:39 GMT
#79
On November 06 2012 08:25 overt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 06 2012 08:03 Epishade wrote:
I voted last week against my will lol. My parents forced me to vote republican with them, even though I dislike both candidates.


They didn't force you to vote Republican. You can vote for whoever you want once you're in the booth by yourself. It's not like your parents walked in and held your hand through the whole process. You could've voted for anyone on the ballot and they'd be none the wiser lol.

You can actually send in the ballot blank, if you want to. You don't have to vote for anyone.
sc2superfan101
Profile Blog Joined February 2012
3583 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-11-06 01:40:24
November 06 2012 01:39 GMT
#80
On November 06 2012 10:29 itsjustatank wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 06 2012 10:20 sc2superfan101 wrote:
On November 06 2012 10:13 itsjustatank wrote:
On November 06 2012 09:48 Daigomi wrote:
Just an ignorant question from an foreigner: What are the exact benefits of having the typical absentee voters vote?

To me, it seems like, unless the preferences of the non-voting population differs significantly from those of the voting population, a sample size of 100m should be more than enough to get an accurate answer. Even if we assume that the non-voting population differs significantly from the voting population (a fairly big assumption), it still doesn't mean that it's a bad thing for them not to vote. In economics there's the idea that a free market allows the distribution of goods to consumers who place the highest value on those goods. Voting seems to be the same. Citizens who place the highest value on elections (and are thus the most likely to vote) get to have a greater say than those who don't value elections (and thus are unlikely to vote). As someone mentioned earlier, this should result in the more informed citizenry voting, ultimately resulting in better decisions being made.

The only situation in which I can personally see the benefit of having the non-voters vote is if there is some systematic factor dissuading a specific population group from voting. For example, before Obama it was possible that a large number of black Americans believed that none of the presidents would support them, resulting in a significant portion of the population not being represented (this is just an example, I have no idea if it black Americans really felt this way). However, as with the systematic bias, this is a very big assumption to make without having strong evidence supporting it. It also won't be fixed by motivating the average American to go vote.

So I guess my question remains: What is the benefit of non-voters voting, and why is it important to get these voters to vote?


First you have to distinguish between absentee voting (which is voting by mail) and not voting. The greatest structural factor dissuading voting is the promotion in the political culture of the United States of keeping turnout low. It is to the advantage of the existing dominant political parties to attempt to reduce the turnout of supporters of the other side, as well as convince the large majority of people who don't vote to continue to do exactly that.

The point is that there is a huge proportion of the voting-eligible population in this country who do not vote, and if they had voted, the results from elections could potentially be drastically different. They end up not voting because the 'market' of voting explicitly prices them out of participating in the economy on purpose. Looking at the current system, with a small minority of people deciding elections in this country, and saying it is indicative of a normal distribution or otherwise okay isn't the way to go, because low turnout is indicative of market failure.

huh? why are you discounting the fact that some of them may not vote because for some of them the vote is not important enough to waste time and money on?

further, how is a "low" turnout indicative of a market failure? especially when the purpose of voting is not simply to fill out and cast a ballot, but to elect effective leaders.


Absentee voting renders your first point moot. Filling out a ballot by mail (or getting it early and turning it in early) 'wastes' no time at all, except for the effort of becoming educated. I would agree that things like declaring Election Day a federal holiday or requiring paid leave for people who want to go out and vote on that day would be useful in driving turnout if that is what you are getting at.

Whether or not the leaders the minority picks are 'effective' can be left up for heated argument. I will say that allowing a minority to pick and leaving a sizable number of people out in the cold is not a fair way of electing leaders. In addition, because elections are more than just about who gets to be the next President of the United States, failing to exercise a sovereign vote in other offices and positions can affect a non-voter even more than if whoever wins the office of the Presidency isn't their first choice.

filling out the ballot early wastes time, just not a lot of it. it also wastes effort becoming informed on political issues. one could argue that an uninformed vote counts as much as an informed one, but then I would counter with the assertion that uninformed votes are the enemy of democracy, not the friend. further, I am not interested in the slightest in driving turnout. in fact, I think a depressed turnout is probably the best that we can hope for (for a variety of reasons).

whether or not the leaders that have been selected are effective is irrelevant to the fact that political representation is meaningless when it becomes the end in of itself. a democracy is not inherently better than a dictatorship. further, there is nothing stopping the majority from voting other than themselves, so your point about the fairness of our system is a straw-man. any system which guarantees the right to vote to the adult populace, regardless of race, religion, sexual preference, economic status, gender, or political persuasion has already passed the standard of being "fair".

and as a response to your third point, I will again ask why a greater number of voters would somehow lead to better leaders and officials on any level: local, state, or federal? unless you think that the mere fact of a vote being cast freely for one side is the primary goal of the democracy, then the turnout is largely irrelevant.
My fake plants died because I did not pretend to water them.
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Replay Cast
00:00
SEL S2 Championship: Playoffs
CranKy Ducklings159
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
RuFF_SC2 151
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 19457
sSak 107
Leta 82
yabsab 38
NaDa 32
Icarus 9
Dota 2
NeuroSwarm109
LuMiX1
League of Legends
JimRising 628
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K288
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox857
C9.Mang0796
Other Games
summit1g6379
shahzam817
WinterStarcraft345
ViBE157
Sick108
Maynarde87
Livibee81
Mew2King55
kaitlyn35
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick902
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH257
• practicex 26
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• iopq 1
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota21015
League of Legends
• Lourlo874
Other Games
• Scarra1147
Upcoming Events
The PondCast
6h 14m
RSL Revival
6h 14m
Maru vs SHIN
MaNa vs MaxPax
Maestros of the Game
13h 14m
Classic vs TriGGeR
Reynor vs SHIN
OSC
23h 14m
MaNa vs SHIN
SKillous vs ShoWTimE
Bunny vs TBD
Cham vs TBD
RSL Revival
1d 6h
Reynor vs Astrea
Classic vs sOs
Maestros of the Game
1d 13h
Serral vs Ryung
ByuN vs Zoun
BSL Team Wars
1d 15h
Team Bonyth vs Team Dewalt
CranKy Ducklings
2 days
RSL Revival
2 days
GuMiho vs Cham
ByuN vs TriGGeR
Cosmonarchy
2 days
TriGGeR vs YoungYakov
YoungYakov vs HonMonO
HonMonO vs TriGGeR
[ Show More ]
Maestros of the Game
2 days
Solar vs Bunny
Clem vs Rogue
[BSL 2025] Weekly
2 days
RSL Revival
3 days
Cure vs Bunny
Creator vs Zoun
Maestros of the Game
3 days
Maru vs Lambo
herO vs ShoWTimE
BSL Team Wars
3 days
Team Hawk vs Team Sziky
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
Monday Night Weeklies
4 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 18: Qualifier 2
SEL Season 2 Championship
HCC Europe

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
BSL 20 Team Wars
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 3
BSL 21 Qualifiers
ASL Season 20
CSL 2025 AUTUMN (S18)
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
Sisters' Call Cup
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025

Upcoming

LASL Season 20
2025 Chongqing Offline CUP
BSL Season 21
BSL 21 Team A
Chzzk MurlocKing SC1 vs SC2 Cup #2
EC S1
BLAST Rivals Fall 2025
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
Thunderpick World Champ.
MESA Nomadic Masters Fall
CS Asia Championships 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.