On March 02 2012 11:21 sc2superfan101 wrote:if it's not worth anyones time to vote, then in a logical world: no one would vote. but then it would suddenly become logical to vote, so they would vote. but then it's not logical to vote, so they wouldn't. but then...
i think you can see where this is going.
It's not a logical world. As this thread proves, most people are subject to cognitive biases and vote even though it's irrational.
$1,000,000 could not get me to not vote. i would give up my life to protect my right to vote. i would send my children to war to protect their right to vote. almost nothing could be more valuable to me than my vote. so, this point is also incorrect. we are dealing with values that are higher than money.
On March 02 2012 11:01 sunprince wrote: Remember, your decision not to vote does not affect other people's decisions.
That's a logical flaw. You're assuming something to be true that isn't true.
If I go into a voting booth, spoil my ballot and leave without telling anyone else that I have done it or acting in any out of the ordinary way then what is different in the world, other than some ink on a page. The world may change down the line but the impact of my choice certainly won't be felt on election day while the ballot is still open. No other votes are changed, no decisions are in any way altered, no actions taken that day are taken any differently to the way they would have been had the ink been placed differently.
one less reason for politicians to focus on you in the future. if one less republican votes in 123 county then its one less reason for republicans to focus on that county in the future (focus meaning campaigning, giving that county more benefits, etc.). same for democrats and other parties. political parties make decisions based on numbers. thats why repbulicans could give a shit about san francisco county, and democrats could give a shit about kern county.
On March 02 2012 11:01 sunprince wrote: Remember, your decision not to vote does not affect other people's decisions.
That's a logical flaw. You're assuming something to be true that isn't true.
If I go into a voting booth, spoil my ballot and leave without telling anyone else that I have done it or acting in any out of the ordinary way then what is different in the world, other than some ink on a page. The world may change down the line but the impact of my choice certainly won't be felt on election day while the ballot is still open. No other votes are changed, no decisions are in any way altered, no actions taken that day are taken any differently to the way they would have been had the ink been placed differently.
You don't know that. You have no way of knowing before the election which way it will turn out, or how close it will be.
If there was some way to know, why even have the elections? Why not just use whatever that method was?
As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, there HAVE been elections at a national level that were decided by individual votes. You have no way of knowing before the election whether or not it will happen again.
On March 02 2012 11:21 sc2superfan101 wrote:if it's not worth anyones time to vote, then in a logical world: no one would vote. but then it would suddenly become logical to vote, so they would vote. but then it's not logical to vote, so they wouldn't. but then...
i think you can see where this is going.
It's not a logical world. As this thread proves, most people are subject to cognitive biases and vote even though it's irrational.
$1,000,000 could not get me to not vote. i would give up my life to protect my right to vote. i would send my children to war to protect their right to vote. almost nothing could be more valuable to me than my vote. so, this point is also incorrect. we are dealing with values that are higher than money.
Damn d00d. I think that is silly.
it's only silly if you don't have faith that doing something right is more important than seeing the right result. i believe that trying to change the things i want changed is extremely important. therefore, my vote, while negligible when looked at from one point of view, is of great importance when looked at from my point of view.
look at it this way: let's say you are with your mother, walking down the street. a group of ten million men come up and say they're gonna rape and murder her. you know that they are going to do it. are you just gonna sit around and watch it happen just because you can't stop it? i may not blame you if you do, but i will sure as the sun rises not! i will go down kicking and screaming and fighting as hard as i can, whether it makes one bit of difference or not. because the real difference it will make is with me.
On March 02 2012 11:21 sc2superfan101 wrote:if it's not worth anyones time to vote, then in a logical world: no one would vote. but then it would suddenly become logical to vote, so they would vote. but then it's not logical to vote, so they wouldn't. but then...
i think you can see where this is going.
It's not a logical world. As this thread proves, most people are subject to cognitive biases and vote even though it's irrational.
$1,000,000 could not get me to not vote. i would give up my life to protect my right to vote. i would send my children to war to protect their right to vote. almost nothing could be more valuable to me than my vote. so, this point is also incorrect. we are dealing with values that are higher than money.
Damn d00d. I think that is silly.
it's only silly if you don't have faith that doing something right is more important than seeing the right result. i believe that trying to change the things i want changed is extremely important. therefore, my vote, while negligible when looked at from one point of view, is of great importance when looked at from my point of view.
look at it this way: let's say you are with your mother, walking down the street. a group of ten million men come up and say they're gonna rape and murder her. you know that they are going to do it. are you just gonna sit around and watch it happen just because you can't stop it? i may not blame you if you do, but i will sure as the sun rises not! i will go down kicking and screaming and fighting as hard as i can, whether it makes one bit of difference or not. because the real difference it will make is with me.
On March 02 2012 11:01 sunprince wrote: Remember, your decision not to vote does not affect other people's decisions.
That's a logical flaw. You're assuming something to be true that isn't true.
If I go into a voting booth, spoil my ballot and leave without telling anyone else that I have done it or acting in any out of the ordinary way then what is different in the world, other than some ink on a page. The world may change down the line but the impact of my choice certainly won't be felt on election day while the ballot is still open. No other votes are changed, no decisions are in any way altered, no actions taken that day are taken any differently to the way they would have been had the ink been placed differently.
You don't know that. You have no way of knowing before the election which way it will turn out, or how close it will be.
If there was some way to know, why even have the elections? Why not just use whatever that method was?
As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, there HAVE been elections at a national level that were decided by individual votes. You have no way of knowing before the election whether or not it will happen again.
Read my post again. I was saying that no decisions regarding the votes of other people will be changed as a result of me spoiling my ballot as opposed to voting for someone but doing everything else the same. Regarding how close it will be, while there is always the possibility that the entire presidential election may rest on the vote of a single individual the guy would probably be better off just using the money he got from winning the lottery a dozen times over and lobbing whoever won the election.
and that is 100% your right to feel that way. but just keep in mind that one of the reasons you have that right, or any right, is because a great many people don't feel that way. if everyone felt that their vote was worthless, we wouldn't have any rights at all, except for what we're given.
On March 02 2012 10:42 BluePanther wrote: I vote because I care.
That said, out of curiousity, if you could change the voting system, what would you change and why? How? Should government structure be changed? I ask these questions since I am legitimately interested in constitutional reform in the US. It's often talked about, but everyone seems afraid to lift a finger and make a push for it (for letigimate political reasons).
I intend to run for office in '14 (although not sure which seat at this time, I will probably hold off a federal run until at least '18), and would love to push this agenda. I know most here aren't registered to vote in the US, but what do you percieve to be flaws and why would you have them changed? And most importantly, which changes would be accepted by the public and which would you consider to be "untouchables"?
What do you think about changing your voting system; watch these series of youtube videos
I think that was proposed about 50 years ago during our voting reforms but did not pass. Interesting video series though.
On March 02 2012 10:59 Millitron wrote:And if everyone thought that way, you may as well not have a democracy at all. Might as well just be a monarchy and cut out the middle-man.
Same damn magical thinking fallacy again.
Again, your decision to vote or not does not affect other people's decisions.
If enough people don't vote and/or it's a close election, then the odds of you affecting the election go up to the point where it makes sense for you to vote again.
I read the articles you provided. It's magical thinking if you believe your actions influence other people's actions, I agree. But he's misapplying that truism in this case. It's magical thinking to say if I don't vote therefore nobody else will vote, but it's not magical thinking to say if nobody votes democracy fails, there is some truth to this. If we have a society where we choose whether or not to vote, then do what you want. Under those conditions if you believe your vote makes a difference I have a bridge to sell you. It might make a difference if everyone was mandated to vote, however, then people like Sarah Palin (god help her) would never be elected. Your vote still wouldn't make a difference, but it would be part of an outcome that would be a better reflection of the will of the people.
On March 02 2012 11:22 Housemd wrote: Heck, I think that if enough people got off of their asses, we can protest NDAA and other horrible laws and get them changed for the better. Now, it may not always work (people protested the Iraq War at the start and we had been there for nine years after) but I think that there is no harm in not trying.
dont blame you guys for not voting down there, the advent of the internet, youtube, socail media has allowed the public to see the corruption that government has been trying to keep hidden. I mean when you are more or less presented with only 2 options by the media and they both push the same terrible legislation (patriot act, NDAA, homeland drones) what does it matter? Either way both parties are turning the US into a police state and the only small difference is frivilous stuff like allowing gay marriage.
On a note about the NDAA, and something you will never see on mainstream media is that Virginia passed legislation that more or less ignores the NDAA on Virginia soil. Other states are in plans to do the same thing, but youll never hear that on the mainstream media because they are under control of those who want the NDAA in place.
Why vote when ur not living in a democracy?? voting in US is like voting in Iran etc. It's obvious to the rest of the world that the election is bullshit but the national media tries to make it look like a democratic election.
On March 02 2012 11:08 dAPhREAk wrote:i dont have to prove my point, you have to disprove it. OBJECTION! lol
You fail logic forever.
The burden is always on the person trying to prove something exists. The default assumption here is that your vote doesn't affect other people. The burden is on you to prove that it does, if you want to insist that this is a reason to vote.
why is that the default assumption?
Because our discussion is operating in conditions where you're trying to insist voting is vitally important.
You don't get rational choice theory at all. If few enough people vote, then it's worth it for you to vote again.
So you're saying, my choice to vote actually does influence others' choice to vote by altering the equation and adjusting the chance that their vote is meaningful? I'm glad you could clarify that for me, makes it easier to refute your earlier statements that this is not so.
On March 02 2012 11:01 sunprince wrote: Remember, your decision not to vote does not affect other people's decisions.
That's a logical flaw. You're assuming something to be true that isn't true.
If I go into a voting booth, spoil my ballot and leave without telling anyone else that I have done it or acting in any out of the ordinary way then what is different in the world, other than some ink on a page. The world may change down the line but the impact of my choice certainly won't be felt on election day while the ballot is still open. No other votes are changed, no decisions are in any way altered, no actions taken that day are taken any differently to the way they would have been had the ink been placed differently.
You don't know that. You have no way of knowing before the election which way it will turn out, or how close it will be.
If there was some way to know, why even have the elections? Why not just use whatever that method was?
As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, there HAVE been elections at a national level that were decided by individual votes. You have no way of knowing before the election whether or not it will happen again.
Read my post again. I was saying that no decisions regarding the votes of other people will be changed as a result of me spoiling my ballot as opposed to voting for someone but doing everything else the same. Regarding how close it will be, while there is always the possibility that the entire presidential election may rest on the vote of a single individual the guy would probably be better off just using the money he got from winning the lottery a dozen times over and lobbing whoever won the election.
It doesn't matter that no one else's decisions are changed. Voting is practically free, so any argument about the costs of voting is futile. I guess the gas to get to the polling place costs money, but if you can't afford that little bit of gas, you have bigger things to be worrying about than whether or not voting is worth it. Further, you can request an absentee ballot, which is absolutely free.
If voting is worth so little to you, that you won't do it even if it is completely free, then you must also not value the right to vote. By extension, you must not value democracy, because without the right to vote, you can't have a democracy.
On March 02 2012 11:36 Sofestafont wrote: Gerrymandering is another huge problem and I'm sure there are some good solution for fixing that. I know must districts are so gerrymandered that there are very few that are actually contested.
Gerrymandering is a real problem. It is the primary reason I did not choose to run in the 2012 elections and have had to postpone my run.
Although it does have some positives. Two of my classmates decided to run after our new changes as they saw an opportunity to unseat incumbents they didn't like. It creates some turnover in government when the lines are redrawn. It's this same reason I nearly ran for another seat (but passed on due to commitment possibility).
On March 02 2012 11:25 dAPhREAk wrote: people who vote decide who gets into office. thats why we vote. people who dont vote, dont matter with respect to a democracy.
This is 100% wrong. Read one of my previous posts if you want to learn why.
On March 02 2012 11:55 ihufa wrote: Why vote when ur not living in a democracy?? voting in US is like voting in Iran etc. It's obvious to the rest of the world that the election is bullshit but the national media tries to make it look like a democratic election.
I don't mean to be rude, but the US elections are not at all "rigged" and are democratic at the heart. We just have a system that is not direct democracy. It doesn't mean that our votes don't matter.
On March 02 2012 11:25 dAPhREAk wrote: people who vote decide who gets into office. thats why we vote. people who dont vote, dont matter with respect to a democracy.
This is 100% wrong. Read one of my previous posts if you want to learn why.
On March 02 2012 11:55 ihufa wrote: Why vote when ur not living in a democracy?? voting in US is like voting in Iran etc. It's obvious to the rest of the world that the election is bullshit but the national media tries to make it look like a democratic election.
I don't mean to be rude, but the US elections are not at all "rigged" and are democratic at the heart. We just have a system that is not direct democracy. It doesn't mean that our votes don't matter.
You only have 2 parties and they're owned by the same coorporations, so they don't need to rig the elections to make sure they stay in power
EPT
