4 ms·

I would think that the rest of the sentence that you deleted is important to understanding the vote. ; turnout, however, was 23%, a historically low figure.[3]

by crusso 9y ago

I would think that the rest of the sentence that you deleted is important to understanding the vote. ; turnout, however, was 23%, a historically low figure.[3] This figure is attributed to a boycott led by the pro-status quo PPD party.[4]

drawkbox 9y ago
Well voting for president in the US only 57% vote of available voters[1], even lower in non presidential votes or midterms at 40% [2], so is that also not valid since everyone doesn't vote? People choose to vote, if people don't vote to have their say that is their own bad. In the US, if only 57% of people vote, you could say our president is only elected by less than about 30% of the people with the popular vote, half the eligible voters or about a third of the country. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_St... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_midterm_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_midterm_election
- crusso 9y ago
  The rules of US elections are fairly well spelled-out, so low turn-out results are not contested. In this case, Congress would need to make the decision that is in keeping with the "people of Puerto Rico". If you read further in the referendum link you posted, there are a number of reasons why the referendum was boycotted. I doubt that Congress would want to jump into the middle of such an ambiguous situation and declare Puerto Rico a state by fiat.
- tertius 9y ago
  How is this relevant to an actual boycott?
  - drawkbox 9y ago
    We are talking low turn out votes, even in the US we have low turnout. People boycott the whole system here and don't vote at all. So you are arguing that our results aren't correct because people stopped voting? If you are saying that because PR had a boycott and some didn't vote that the vote is a fraud, then you could say the same about ANY vote in the US because people boycott or don't vote because they don't believe in the system or think it is rigged etc or many other reasons. That is why you have to vote, boycotting votes is not smart, probably the worst use of a boycott ever as it takes your power away. Usually boycotts are to gain power i.e. not purchasing from a certain company. Boycotting a vote isn't even worth mentioning, it is just not smart.
    - tertius 9y ago
      I think the problem with your analysis is that you left out the line of the boycott which is, in this case, quite important. Your comment here about "people don't vote all the time for different reasons" doesn't amount to the situation in PR at all. It's significant, and to ignore it is dishonest. Whether you believe a boycott is "smart" or not.
- rayiner 9y ago
  Those are very different things. U.S. elections are set forth according to the law, are binding, and have legally-defined results. If people don't show up, it means they don't really care about the result and are fine with getting whatever everyone else chooses. The Puerto Rico statehood referendums are not undertaken pursuant to any law and are not binding. It's like the government of Maryland holding a referendum on secession from the U.S. If only a quarter of eligible voters show up, that doesn't mean that everyone else wants to go along with the minority. It means that the majority don't see the effort as legitimate in the first place. (There is a reason why people would view the 2017 referendum as illegitimate. The ballot was biased against the non-statehood options, e.g. calling Puerto Rico's current status that of a "colony").

by crusso 9y ago

drawkbox 9y ago

Well voting for president in the US only 57% vote of available voters[1], even lower in non presidential votes or midterms at 40% [2], so is that also not valid since everyone doesn't vote? People choose to vote, if people don't vote to have their say that is their own bad. In the US, if only 57% of people vote, you could say our president is only elected by less than about 30% of the people with the popular vote, half the eligible voters or about a third of the country. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_St... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_midterm_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_midterm_election

crusso 9y ago
The rules of US elections are fairly well spelled-out, so low turn-out results are not contested. In this case, Congress would need to make the decision that is in keeping with the "people of Puerto Rico". If you read further in the referendum link you posted, there are a number of reasons why the referendum was boycotted. I doubt that Congress would want to jump into the middle of such an ambiguous situation and declare Puerto Rico a state by fiat.
tertius 9y ago
How is this relevant to an actual boycott?
- drawkbox 9y ago
  We are talking low turn out votes, even in the US we have low turnout. People boycott the whole system here and don't vote at all. So you are arguing that our results aren't correct because people stopped voting? If you are saying that because PR had a boycott and some didn't vote that the vote is a fraud, then you could say the same about ANY vote in the US because people boycott or don't vote because they don't believe in the system or think it is rigged etc or many other reasons. That is why you have to vote, boycotting votes is not smart, probably the worst use of a boycott ever as it takes your power away. Usually boycotts are to gain power i.e. not purchasing from a certain company. Boycotting a vote isn't even worth mentioning, it is just not smart.
  - tertius 9y ago
    I think the problem with your analysis is that you left out the line of the boycott which is, in this case, quite important. Your comment here about "people don't vote all the time for different reasons" doesn't amount to the situation in PR at all. It's significant, and to ignore it is dishonest. Whether you believe a boycott is "smart" or not.
rayiner 9y ago
Those are very different things. U.S. elections are set forth according to the law, are binding, and have legally-defined results. If people don't show up, it means they don't really care about the result and are fine with getting whatever everyone else chooses. The Puerto Rico statehood referendums are not undertaken pursuant to any law and are not binding. It's like the government of Maryland holding a referendum on secession from the U.S. If only a quarter of eligible voters show up, that doesn't mean that everyone else wants to go along with the minority. It means that the majority don't see the effort as legitimate in the first place. (There is a reason why people would view the 2017 referendum as illegitimate. The ballot was biased against the non-statehood options, e.g. calling Puerto Rico's current status that of a "colony").