Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

FleaBagger (31.23)

Not voting today

Recs

16

November 02, 2010 – Comments (16)

I am not voting today. Part of the reason may be that I'm lazy, but let's examine it a little closer: first, I do not like any major candidate's positions on the issues. For me to vote for them would be a form of lying. I'm not Macchiavellian, I'm rather simple: if you publicly call for things I find loathsome, I will not vote for you. If you lied in campaigns before, got elected, and did the opposite of some of the things you promised, I will not vote for you. That pretty much disqualifies about 99% of candidates nationwide, and all the ones in my district.

Second, voting might be hypocritical for a radical voluntarianist such as myself. I'm still contemplating how I should approach the issue in the event someone runs on a platform I endorse (or at least moving towards the things I endorse) and is, as far as I can tell, an honorable person. I suppose voting for such a candidate would be worth a try. 

If we can't prove a defendant guilty, we don't put him in jail (theoretically), and if you aren't sure a car is right for you, you don't lay out thousands of dollars to buy it. It doesn't mean we're sure he's innocent or we like having an old beater (or no car at all), it just means we don't take overt action if we don't even know if it's unjust or not. Likewise, if I'm not thoroughly convinced that my vote would abet liberty, I'm not going to cast it.  

16 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On November 02, 2010 at 5:07 PM, TMFCrocoStimpy (93.55) wrote:

Inaction carries a significant weight in these instances.  If you want to have a chance to be heard, go to the polls and write in a candidate who carries your beliefs - even if it has to be yourself.  No, this person will not be elected, but if people who are truly discontent were to take such actions then the message would be conveyed far more clearly than being mixed together with the simply apathetic voter.  Just my 2 cents.

-Stimpy

Report this comment
#2) On November 02, 2010 at 5:28 PM, outoffocus (24.47) wrote:

I agree with Croco.  Thats exactly what I did today.  For every candidate I didn't like I wrote in a candidate. I event voted for a third party in a few instances.  I'm sure out of the 6 people I voted for, maybe one will be elected.  But is sure feels good not to have to vote for the lesser of 2 evils anymore.

Report this comment
#3) On November 02, 2010 at 6:12 PM, TMFAleph1 (95.78) wrote:

I feel much the same way you do, FeaBagger.

Report this comment
#4) On November 02, 2010 at 6:14 PM, devoish (98.76) wrote:

http://current.com/news/92764065_we-are-all-naked-and-vulnerable-vote.htm?xid=RSSfeed 

Of course I do not have your issue. The Green Party has the common sense policys America needs.

Report this comment
#5) On November 02, 2010 at 6:40 PM, tobernator1000 (< 20) wrote:

I'll throw another voice behind writing in a candidate if you really can't find one you're ok voting for. The difference between an apathetic citizen and an unhappy citizen is HUGE, and voting is the only way to let politicians know which one you are. 

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." 

Report this comment
#6) On November 02, 2010 at 6:52 PM, russiangambit (29.98) wrote:

> .  For every candidate I didn't like I wrote in a candidate

Can you write in a candidate on a electronic voting machine? I don't think so. I didn't see a write in option.

Report this comment
#7) On November 02, 2010 at 7:18 PM, wolfhounds (29.13) wrote:

Thomas Jefferson was the most radical poitician of his time. I'll bet the early voters of America didn't stay home because of that. Maybe some of us should reconnect with the reason we have the right to vote.

Report this comment
#8) On November 02, 2010 at 7:40 PM, FleaBagger (31.23) wrote:

Thomas Jefferson was a libertarian until he was elected president. His story, and the anti-deficit, free-market campaign speeches of FDR, make me extremely reluctant to vote, even if a candidate were to claim to share my views.

Report this comment
#9) On November 02, 2010 at 9:13 PM, HarryCarysGhost (99.78) wrote:

Hi Fleabagger,I just got back from voting an hour ago.

To me if you don't vote it's a vote for taxation without representation.

I've always felt that the two-party system was a choice between a douche and a turd.

So I voted for some libertarian candidates, one Green Party, And A couple from either the Dems, or Reps.

Some of my choices don't have a snowballs chance in hell of winning, but thats fine with me. My voice is still heard.

A little history- I'm the dude who voted for Ross Perot twice.

Report this comment
#10) On November 02, 2010 at 9:51 PM, ChrisGraley (31.57) wrote:

Russian, yes you can write in candidates for the federal elections on the electronic machines. In my state, I don't think you can write in for the state or local elections, but your's might be different. I used to live in Texas, but I don't remember. 

I was actually pretty excited about this election. I voted for a bunch of Libertarians, a moderate Republican and a Democrat that I was hoping to be a little more moderate, but was much closer to my beliefs than the other candidate. I also voted for a candidate from the Constitution party. The only thing that I wasn't happy about were a couple of local judge races where I didn't know enough about either candidate. I voted against the incumbent both times. I figure that if either candidate didn't make it known enough to me what their positions are, I'd pick the new guy rather than the guy that had a chance to demonstrate those beliefs during the time he served. If you stand for something, then stand for it. What you do as a judge means more to me than a campaign commercial.

Report this comment
#11) On November 02, 2010 at 10:05 PM, russiangambit (29.98) wrote:

> I figure that if either candidate didn't make it known enough to me what their positions are, I'd pick the new guy rather than the guy that had a chance to demonstrate those beliefs during the time he served. If you stand for something, then stand for it. What you do as a judge means more to me than a campaign commercial.

We had something like 70 judges for Harris county. Urghh. No clue on any of them.

Report this comment
#12) On November 02, 2010 at 10:40 PM, RootnToot (30.51) wrote:

#10

Me too!!

Report this comment
#13) On November 03, 2010 at 10:07 AM, familyfund2 (< 20) wrote:

I Iike you Flea.

Not voting is like voting that 'a bureaucracy and a bunch of chumps are enough to make me apathetic'.

I'm too american to be apathetic.

If your not happy with the candidates and the system, the solution is simple. . . . 

BECOME INVOLVED IN MORE THAN THE LAST SECOND.

Don't wait till voting day to feel chumped. You have days weeks and years to do something. Everybody that waits years doing little to nothing, and then is too lazy to spend 10 minutes voting, has misunderstood the primary mechanic of democracy and deserves what they get. 

Report this comment
#14) On November 03, 2010 at 12:40 PM, RonChapmanJr (98.18) wrote:

I know people who write themselves in for everything but are really only there to vote on the local initiatives.  I wrote myself in for one position yesterday when I couldn't find anyone I liked.

Report this comment
#15) On November 03, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Pick1es (23.33) wrote:

Find the dumbest person you can, ask them who they are voting for, then vote in a way to cancel their vote.

Report this comment
#16) On November 03, 2010 at 2:47 PM, FleaBagger (31.23) wrote:

I think not voting accomplishes something. I was wondering why politicians and their mouthpieces in the media get so anxious about low voter turnout, and then it occurred to me that it signals that there is very little active support for their policies. And their policies are always those of more state control over our lives, so low voter turnout actually impedes the wheels of progress - the progress of totalitarianism. 

As far as being involved in more than the last second, I can think of more useful uses for my time. If your voting day actions can't effect change for liberty, that means one of two things: either you didn't get involved soon enough, or you're not going to change anything with elections anyway. I think the latter is more realistic, and I'm willing to be judged by history for that.

Sting said something that rhymed with "Bear is go folitical pollution." (I don't want TMF to have to choose between paying royalties and taking my post down.) Perhaps he's right. I tend to think that the only way to be free is for a majority of society to be intolerant of tyranny, statism, and all the other crimes that go along with them. 

Best of luck with these election results. 

P.S.I think it would be dishonest to write myself in, because I would never serve in public office, but I would vote for Ron Chapman, Jr. 

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement