5 ms·

> It's not obvious to me that higher voter turnout leads to better governance. Higher than what? Anyway, I think you’re projecting a lot of rationality where

by drb91 8y ago

> It's not obvious to me that higher voter turnout leads to better governance. Higher than what? Anyway, I think you’re projecting a lot of rationality where there’s just apathy. In any case, low voter turnout tends to harm the democrats, as demonstrated by the ludicrous variety of ways various state republican parties have made voting difficult for working people, poor people, non-english speakers, felons, etc etc.

mc32 8y ago
A few authoritarian regimes have been known have high voter turnout. Russia recently had 67% turnout, Cuba 90%, Turkey had 85% though turkey is compulsory. So, turnout is kind of an independent index. Also, statistically speaking, if the turnout is “representative” then high or low makes no difference with regard to what would occur with full turnout. When people say we want high turnout, I think they really mean I want my side to have full turnout and the opposition very low turnout —as this is the only situation where this quest makes sense.
- drb91 8y ago
  Yes, turnout by itself is not a good index. But that seems like a strawman.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- tinbad 8y ago
  I don’t know about the others but in Russia, most employers will make you go and vote. Sometimes for a small reward, go vote for the “preferred” candidate and get $100. Which is significant for someone living off a median wage.
wu-ikkyu 8y ago
Let's flip a coin: heads I win, tails you lose. If you decide not to play, are you being more rational or more apathetic?
cheeseomlit 8y ago
-
- mariojv 8y ago
  I know many non-English speaking or limited English speaking citizens. Why wouldn't you want them voting?
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    Side comment: We had a situation here where there was a candidate for a judge, whose name was Uno. (He was ethnically Japanese.) Well, in one of the counties where his name was on the ballot, Hispanics were more than 5% of the population. The election rules required that, for such counties, the ballot instructions be written in Spanish as well as in English. For the judgeship in question, voters were to vote for only one candidate. The translation of that instruction into Spanish was "Vota para uno"! Note well: I am not saying that citizens who don't speak English shouldn't vote.
- ilikehurdles 8y ago
  Give out free IDs, streamline the ID process, and I won't care about ID requirements. Where I live, while there are DMVs in the city, the only DMVs that provide IDs and licenses are in the suburbs, many of which close at 4:30 PM. Requiring a person to pay for an ID and hope to qualify for a reimbursement later is just two steps removed from a poll tax. Yes of course I want felons to vote (especially if they've served their sentence), and non-english speakers as well. A citizen is a citizen.
mindslight 8y ago
> Anyway, I think you’re projecting a lot of rationality where there’s just apathy. Calling it "just apathy" is unjustifiable maligning. How is it not completely rational to be apathetic to whether business interests A or business interests B win their contest? What you're doing is the equivalent of a sports fanatic insisting that someone pick a team to root for. Give these "apathetic" people an actual choice (like say a pitchfork) and you'll see how they really feel. In fact, I'd posit that a primary mechanism by which elections are won is convincing people that "this time will be different".
- skybrian 8y ago
  This boils down to an argument that none of the issues that divide the parties matter to you. Apparently you don't care about immigration, feminism, LGBT issues, inequality and so on? Trump is boring? American politics in 2018 is not lacking in drama or stark divisions. If today's politics doesn't excite you, what could possibly do it?
  - justtopost 8y ago
    The divisions are both extreme and bad. I don't want Nationalist isolationism anymore than I want unrelenting psudeo-socalist globalists who are Both clearly in the pocket of big business. No, the issues of social identity are not the real issues facing our country in my humble opinion.
  - JackFr 8y ago
    Well, under our two party system you end up with two shopping carts full of positions, and you've got to buy one of them. Now neither shopping cart typically lines up perfectly with a hypothetical voter, but what do you do if both baskets contain things that you feel deeply about and oppose? For instance where should a voter who cares deeply about abortion and capital punishment to go? The Democrats are not simply pro-choice, they demean and belittle his pro-life position. The Republicans find it inconceivable that he doesn't want to execute people guilty of the most heinous crimes, and he's dismissed as an unserious bleeding-heart. So maybe it's not that he's unexcited by the issues, but rather because of his strong inclinations he has no one to vote for. It might be that low turnout is evidence that the current 'baskets' of the two parties are poorly aligned with the current electorate.

by drb91 8y ago

mc32 8y ago

A few authoritarian regimes have been known have high voter turnout. Russia recently had 67% turnout, Cuba 90%, Turkey had 85% though turkey is compulsory. So, turnout is kind of an independent index. Also, statistically speaking, if the turnout is “representative” then high or low makes no difference with regard to what would occur with full turnout. When people say we want high turnout, I think they really mean I want my side to have full turnout and the opposition very low turnout —as this is the only situation where this quest makes sense.

drb91 8y ago
Yes, turnout by itself is not a good index. But that seems like a strawman.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
tinbad 8y ago
I don’t know about the others but in Russia, most employers will make you go and vote. Sometimes for a small reward, go vote for the “preferred” candidate and get $100. Which is significant for someone living off a median wage.

wu-ikkyu 8y ago

Let's flip a coin: heads I win, tails you lose. If you decide not to play, are you being more rational or more apathetic?

cheeseomlit 8y ago

mariojv 8y ago
I know many non-English speaking or limited English speaking citizens. Why wouldn't you want them voting?
- AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  Side comment: We had a situation here where there was a candidate for a judge, whose name was Uno. (He was ethnically Japanese.) Well, in one of the counties where his name was on the ballot, Hispanics were more than 5% of the population. The election rules required that, for such counties, the ballot instructions be written in Spanish as well as in English. For the judgeship in question, voters were to vote for only one candidate. The translation of that instruction into Spanish was "Vota para uno"! Note well: I am not saying that citizens who don't speak English shouldn't vote.
ilikehurdles 8y ago
Give out free IDs, streamline the ID process, and I won't care about ID requirements. Where I live, while there are DMVs in the city, the only DMVs that provide IDs and licenses are in the suburbs, many of which close at 4:30 PM. Requiring a person to pay for an ID and hope to qualify for a reimbursement later is just two steps removed from a poll tax. Yes of course I want felons to vote (especially if they've served their sentence), and non-english speakers as well. A citizen is a citizen.

mindslight 8y ago

> Anyway, I think you’re projecting a lot of rationality where there’s just apathy. Calling it "just apathy" is unjustifiable maligning. How is it not completely rational to be apathetic to whether business interests A or business interests B win their contest? What you're doing is the equivalent of a sports fanatic insisting that someone pick a team to root for. Give these "apathetic" people an actual choice (like say a pitchfork) and you'll see how they really feel. In fact, I'd posit that a primary mechanism by which elections are won is convincing people that "this time will be different".

skybrian 8y ago
This boils down to an argument that none of the issues that divide the parties matter to you. Apparently you don't care about immigration, feminism, LGBT issues, inequality and so on? Trump is boring? American politics in 2018 is not lacking in drama or stark divisions. If today's politics doesn't excite you, what could possibly do it?
- justtopost 8y ago
  The divisions are both extreme and bad. I don't want Nationalist isolationism anymore than I want unrelenting psudeo-socalist globalists who are Both clearly in the pocket of big business. No, the issues of social identity are not the real issues facing our country in my humble opinion.
- JackFr 8y ago
  Well, under our two party system you end up with two shopping carts full of positions, and you've got to buy one of them. Now neither shopping cart typically lines up perfectly with a hypothetical voter, but what do you do if both baskets contain things that you feel deeply about and oppose? For instance where should a voter who cares deeply about abortion and capital punishment to go? The Democrats are not simply pro-choice, they demean and belittle his pro-life position. The Republicans find it inconceivable that he doesn't want to execute people guilty of the most heinous crimes, and he's dismissed as an unserious bleeding-heart. So maybe it's not that he's unexcited by the issues, but rather because of his strong inclinations he has no one to vote for. It might be that low turnout is evidence that the current 'baskets' of the two parties are poorly aligned with the current electorate.