I'm not Voting & It Ticks People Off

[freestate]

Hello everyone,

I resonate strongly with Steve's sentiment that voting would be supporting a fear-based system. Even Erin has expressed her opinion that the value of a vote is useless: US Presidential Election - Erin's call?


My question is, how do I best respond to how my extended family is reacting to my decision not to vote. I find their reactions curious, almost as if my decision not to vote has violated their sense of self. I even was mock-bribed to vote.

To be clear, I'm not interested in people presenting arguments telling me to vote. I'd just like to know how to best respond to others reactions.

Thanks.

[Parthon]

Ask them "I'm free to vote for whoever I want right?"

If they are open minded people and respond with "Of course!", then rerespond with "Well, I'm choosing to vote for noone."

They will of course be baffled, but just start your case without responding to arguments. If you really stand by your decision 100% then whatever anyone else says shouldn't make a different.

[silicon toad2000]

In australia it is compulsory to vote. I beleive that one of the keys to democracy is being involved. All these people may vote, but really what have they done to make a difference. One of the keys is to make your voice heard. I would swap 100 voters for 10 average joe/janes who were passionate about government and corresponded with their elected officials.
Don't vote, but do make sure you contribute to the democratic process. I think a lot of the problem with the government is that they do what they think is best and what they think their people want. If noone corrects them they will continue.

[missing]

they make you vote in Australia? I at least hope they give you the option of "nobody, these people all suck".

to freestate's concern, isn't voting supposed to be confidential? That should include non-voting, if you so choose. If anybody asks, you could just tell them, "it's none of your business". Probably too late for that, and won't shut them up, but oh well.

It's funny, but it seems every election year this issue of weather or not to vote comes up. It's sad that we have such lame candidates so many people choose to simply not vote. I do vote personally, but I completely understand those who don't, and I hate the adage "you didn't vote, so you can't complain". Though why you'd want the right to complain is a completely separate matter.

[cinnabar]

I think you might enjoy this comic, then!

Seriously, it's no one else's business who you vote for, or whether you don't vote at all... I guess you could always say, "I don't like either candidate, so why would I vote for one of them?"

[Brutha]

Voting has a lot to do with being part in a certain group.
If you oppose a given system (and follow Steves resoning in this case) you shouldn't surprised if people inside the given system oppose yourself.
That the price you have to be willing to pay for consciously opposing the system.

[Still Growing]

The right to vote is just that.

A true right should not mean that its a requirement.

In fact, some people probably should not vote. I know this won't be popular to say but I think that the voting age should be raised to 25 years old.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Still Growing

In fact, some people probably should not vote. I know this won't be popular to say but I think that the voting age should be raised to 25 years old.

I don't think that would solve the issue that you feel results from the immaturity of the voter (as I am reading your words, please correct me if I'm wrong). The issue isn't age, but involvement and maturity. There are some highly conscious and compassionate and passionate young people out there who have what it takes to make a difference. And some older people who don't care, can't be bothered or vote a popularity contest.

I don't think that cutting out the 18-25 year olds is a good measure of weeding out the unconscious and immature...those traits are ageless!

And in case anyone is wondering, I'm not under 25 .

To the OP, it's really no one's business who you vote for or whether you vote at all. You can politely say this to anyone who's harassing you and then just refuse to engage in further conversation on the subject.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by freestate

My question is, how do I best respond to how my extended family is reacting to my decision not to vote.

You respond by being present and responding authentically in the moment.

What you're doing, if you ask others how you should respond and then preparing and storing up a canned response, is not authentic response; in fact, it sounds more like the kind of fear-based reactive system you're trying to avoid.

Not that there's anything wrong with that. If you go that route, perhaps you'd like to answer their questions with a question, such as "Why is this important to you?" or with a simple acknowledgement: "I get that it's important to you that everyone votes. Thanks for your input."

And if you still feel resistance, recognize that it's fear underneath, and take on another way of being that works better for you.

[Savage]

If other people are ticked off by your choices, to whom do the ticks belong?

[freddy]

I like to tell people I'm not voting. And I'm not. And you get the ones who say, its your duty as American to vote. After they tell me how important it is to vote for about 10 minutes or so. I ask who they will be voting for. And when they tell me. I say, I going to vote for the other guy just to cancel out your vote. shuts them up every time.

[WordKeeper]

freestate - why tell them?

[Gabo]

I don't see what is accomplished by not voting.
Most people don't vote because they don't like the major candidates, but instead of voting for someone they DO like to send the message that they are unhappy with the given choices, they don't vote at all and the major candidates keep winning elections when nobody really likes them.

To those that don't want to vote: Is there any person you know in the world that you think would make a good leader for this country? If so, why not vote for them to express your preference?


PS: I don't want to make non-voters vote, but I don't really grasp the concept of non-voting.

[fountainAtlas]

I run into this too. A great response to "if you don't vote, you can't complain" is the following:

The American Constitution declares that there are certain inalienable rights "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Forcing me to vote is robbing me of my liberty. Also, define what liberty means " freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice"

Forcing me to not express my views because I did not vote, violates the First Amendment.

This type of response gets me response of "oh, that just BS and you know it". Ironically, I got that from a lawyer in training. But other really think about what I am saying.

Hope this helps,

-FountainAtlas

[freddy]

There is no simple answer to this question of non- voting. When you have two losers running for office, the time it takes to go vote is a waste of my limited time on this planet. It would be pointless to write in some ones name. So why do that? This government has gotten way to big, and really the voting is just a big scam of payoffs. Just look at the bailout bill that got passed. Somewhere someone is getting millions of dollars for wooden arrows tied into that bill. At the end of the day, who ever gets elected, will just make you bend over a little further and take it in the a--. I just hope they don't run out of KY jelly. And whoever said "if you don't vote you have no right to complain".
Kiss My A-- I pay my taxes. Until the goverment exempts me, I'll speak my opinion of a corrupted system.

[Angela]

Nobody's forcing you to vote, not in the U.S., anyway.

I think when people say, "if you don't vote, you can't complain," they are not literally saying you are not allowed to complain or you will be prevented from complaining. Rather, they're saying, if you don't vote, I'm not interested in hearing your ineffective whining about the leaders and laws you've ended up with, as it appears that you are not willing to lift a finger to participate in the democratic process in a way that actually makes a difference to who and what those leaders and laws are.

The First Amendment protects your right to free speech, but it doesn't mandate that people listen to you. The Constitution does mandate, however, that your vote be counted.

[Andrew Brunelle]

Voting is something that everyone in my family forced me to do this year. They told me how important it is to vote, even though I don't feel that way. I didn't vote last election, my first year of eligibility (2004), because I didn't resonate with any candidates. Now I feel like if I don't vote, I'll be out of the family. And as the late great George Carlin said, "If you vote, you have no right to complain." I don't want to lose that right. If the president I helped elect messes up, then I'm partially to blame, but if I don't vote whatsoever, the blame is on everyone else. Besides, the president doesn't have as much control as most of America thinks he does.

[danas]

I totally understand that you do not resonate with any of the candidates, but I also understand why it ticks people off.
Because you can be sure that these guys for example will definitely use their votes.
By not voting you are actually voting for the candidate that least resonates with you.
The way I see it, not voting is still voting. Even if I the candidates dont resonate with me Ill still vote for the least worse option.

[wachusettgirl]

Originally Posted by danas

I totally understand that you do not resonate with any of the candidates, but I also understand why it ticks people off.
Because you can be sure that these guys for example will definitely use their votes.
By not voting you are actually voting for the candidate that least resonates with you.
The way I see it, not voting is still voting. Even if I the candidates dont resonate with me Ill still vote for the least worse option.

I agree, and even if neither of the candidates is ideal to you, you do know that there are 4 other candidates besides McCain and Obama on the ballot, as well as the opportunity to write one in. Also there are races in the Senate, the House and for Councillors in your local districts. The presidential candidates of the future are likely to come from these places.
Here in my state there are also three questions on the ballot, one on state income tax, one on lessening possesion of marijuana charges, and one on making dog racing illegal (this pertains to animal cruelty).
I understand why you wouldn't want to vote for someone that you don't like, but even if there is one issue that you feel strongly about, such as global warming, freedom of choice, gay rights, gun control, capital punishment... the next president will most likely be appointing three supreme court judges in his first term, making this the most important election for the court in decades. The appointments will tip the scales in the court to be either more liberal or conservative, affecting many decisions for the future.
Sorry, I know you didn't want to hear reasons to vote, but I couldn't help myself. The bottom line it really is up to you, and if you believe that voting for what you believe in is supporting a fear-based system, then that's what you should tell your family.

[freestate]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

If other people are ticked off by your choices, to whom do the ticks belong?

Why polyticks, of course!
Point well taken though. I can't take ownership of their reactions to my decisions. I see that quote made it on your twitter as well, haha.

wachusettgirl,
Well that's what I said, but that typically makes them angry. Now they're trying to encourage me to vote locally only, but I feel to make an informed decision I'd need to research all the local candidates, which isn't something I have time for right now.

Andrew Brunell,
It's nice to know I'm not alone in this. Don't worry, you always have the choice next time. You can't let them rule your mind!

[freddy]

Originally Posted by Angela

Nobody's forcing you to vote, not in the U.S., anyway.

I think when people say, "if you don't vote, you can't complain," they are not literally saying you are not allowed to complain or you will be prevented from complaining. Rather, they're saying, if you don't vote, I'm not interested in hearing your ineffective whining about the leaders and laws you've ended up with, as it appears that you are not willing to lift a finger to participate in the democratic process in a way that actually makes a difference to who and what those leaders and laws are.

The First Amendment protects your right to free speech, but it doesn't mandate that people listen to you. The Constitution does mandate, however, that your vote be counted.

by "Wendy McElroy"

Those for whom non-voting is conscious statement of protest generally argue as follows:

The check mark or the punched chad on a ballot means "yes" it is the consent you give to the electoral process by virtue of participating. No wonder all candidates agree on one point: you should vote. They are like religious leaders who urge you to worship at the church of your choice. First and foremost, politicians want you to sanction the process by which they acquire power and money because, without that sanction, they have no legitimacy.


It is commonly said, "If you don’t vote, you have no right to complain about the outcome." The opposite is true. By playing the game, voters agree to the rules. Only those who don’t play and withhold their consent have a right to complain about the outcome, especially since the winner will have his hand in the non-voter’s pocket.

Voting is not an act of political freedom. It is an act of political conformity. Those who refuse to vote are not expressing silence. They are screaming in the politician’s ear: "You do not represent me. This is not a process in which my voice matters. I do not believe you."

Non-voting has a rich and long history through which the dissenting electorate has expressed everything from religious convictions to political cynicism. That history has been conspicuously ignored. If people truly believe voting is important, they should use their mouths to do more than insult non-voters and utter election slogans. They should discuss and debate the issue with those who disagree.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by freddy

Voting is not an act of political freedom. It is an act of political conformity. Those who refuse to vote are not expressing silence. They are screaming in the politician’s ear: "You do not represent me. This is not a process in which my voice matters. I do not believe you."

That may be the message you're screaming, but it's not the message that's being heard.

The message that's being heard is: "I don't care enough to participate, so you guys go ahead and make community policy decisions for me."

And that's the message that gets acted upon.

You want to change the system? Take effective action. If you're taking effective action outside of voting, then you have no problem in knowing how to respond to people who push you to vote. You just say, "No, thanks; I'm taking action to change the system instead."

Refusing to vote and sitting around complaining about the results is just not effective action, as you can see by the continuation of this "illegitimate process." If someone expresses disdain for your complaining and taking no effective action to make a positive difference, they're also covered by the First Amendment, and you don't have to listen to them if you don't want to, either.

[Gabo]

Freddy,

You make an interesting point, but I just don't think it has practical application. If you don't believe in making change through the election process, then you must have some other way to enact the change. Otherwise, you are simply letting other people run your life. What alternative ways would you propose of enacting political change besides participating in our current system?

I personally believe an electoral system can benefit society, but in the US the system is failing because of several reasons. Those include massive non-participation by those who don't like the winners, assumption that one only has two choices, extreme media bias, and control of the process by the two major parties.

However, I think the only practical solution is to gather the huge majority of people that aren't happy with the current system, and vote people into office that will actually legislate according to what we want. Not voting just lets the two bad parties continually tighten their control and keep drifting farther and farther away from what the people want.

[wachusettgirl]

Originally Posted by Still Growing

The right to vote is just that.

A true right should not mean that its a requirement.

In fact, some people probably should not vote. I know this won't be popular to say but I think that the voting age should be raised to 25 years old.

Respectfully, and strongly disagree. A new generation is coming into power. Young people are no longer self-absorbed and unengaged. 75% of 18-29 year olds are registered to vote, that means that even if only 80% turns out (like they did in the last election), then the under 30 will read a 61.2% turnout. Many of this population are college/university students, the "cream of the crop", studying under the most progressive intellectuals in the world. Also most kids over 17 are working and paying taxes, so why shouldn't they be allowed to vote?
This generation is socially tolerant, politically bipartisan, environmentally aware, and very actively engaged. Don't count them out. Gen-We.org Video

[Parthon]

After all the arguments, if I lived in america I'd vote for myself, or I'd vote for someone I could trust and would fight for the greater good, not naming anyone of course.

Now, if you vote and your vote doesn't matter because of a flawed system, you can still complain, right?

[freestate]

I find it interesting how the issue of complaining has made its way into this thread. You may notice that I never mentioned complaining in the original post. I'm not interested in complaining. I don't enjoy it in myself or others.

What I am interested in is good logical arguments to use to explain my feelings about voting.

[freddy]

Originally Posted by Gabo

Freddy,

You make an interesting point, but I just don't think it has practical application. If you don't believe in making change through the election process, then you must have some other way to enact the change. Otherwise, you are simply letting other people run your life. What alternative ways would you propose of enacting political change besides participating in our current system?

I personally believe an electoral system can benefit society, but in the US the system is failing because of several reasons. Those include massive non-participation by those who don't like the winners, assumption that one only has two choices, extreme media bias, and control of the process by the two major parties.

However, I think the only practical solution is to gather the huge majority of people that aren't happy with the current system, and vote people into office that will actually legislate according to what we want. Not voting just lets the two bad parties continually tighten their control and keep drifting farther and farther away from what the people want.

What you see as inaction on my part by not voting. I see as the only viable way for a total reform of the government policy for positive change. To continue to vote for the lesser of the two parties, just continues the same old system year in year out. The politicians love this system. This change might not happen in my life time but it could. If you can get a majority of people feed up with life time politicians lining their pockets. That same majority could decide if they wanted to keep or run out of town and the United States the elected politician just by size. To think you will elect a honest man into office, and send him or her in to that corrupted way of doing business, and be able to make any true change, is absurd. This well intention elected person finds out, you either play ball with the lifers if you want something to get done. He then begins to line his pockets and works on his life long career.
Not to worry though. Whoever get elected will do no worse than the many before him.
Note: sorry freestate If my opinion hurt your feelings.

[silicon toad2000]

I was talking to a friend about this thread, he corrected me. In Australia you don't have to vote, you do however need to turn up to a polling booth, have your name checked off and receive a ballot paper. (yes we use paper and pencils here).
I want to reiterate my earlier point, if you don't vote, at least write a letter to a senator or your local member.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by freestate

What I am interested in is good logical arguments to use to explain my feelings about voting.

Again, why are you asking us? You've already stated that "voting would be supporting a fear-based system." Why wouldn't you just say that to anyone who pressures you? Does it not feel "strong" enough? Do you feel vulnerable to pressure or bribes, or do you fear having to contend with hurt feelings or anger?

p.s. the issue of complaining came up because that's something we hear a lot, this idea that if you don't vote, you can't complain.

[Barcs]

Nobody should get angry if people don't vote. It is a right and not a requirement, however I do not understand why so many do not. There are plenty of candidates to vote for, and even officials for your local town government are on the ballad. I see absolutely no reason, not to vote. I vote every single year, regardless of whether it's an election year or not. Your vote might not count for much in the presidential race, but in your town it definitely does. Instead of not voting, why not just vote for a 3rd party? That way at least you are making a statement, instead of doing nothing.

If it were up to me, voting would be required but a "no confidence" choice would be on the ballad, for those who wish to make a statement against the system. This way when the election results are being tallied and people see Obama 30%, McCain 25%, no confidence 40% people will at least attempt to try and change the system a bit. In fact, take it one step further and if "no confidence" wins over the candidates then new candidates are chosen. That would be a lot closer to a true democracy.

Did you really expect to post a thread like this and not have people try and convince you to vote?

This year's voting plan:

President: Cynthia McKinney

Representatives: Whoever voted YES for the bailout plan is not getting a YES from me. Simple as that. I don't really care about their political party.

Sorry about going a little OT here.