Democracies are supposed to represent everybody, and I don't think the GP would disagree. The things you cite as being consigned to the dust bin are all struct

Democracies are supposed to represent everybody, and I don't think the GP would disagree. The things you cite as being consigned to the dust bin are all structural remedies -- changes to how elections are run with the intent of removing voters from the rolls and preventing people from voting. Apathy-inducing speech is not that at all -- people have to make the choice to not vote; nothing is preventing them. Where there are things preventing them, we as a nation should be doing our utmost to remove those barriers. But not voting is a perfectly valid statement to make in a democracy. It can be a statement of lack of confidence in any of the candidates, or a statement of deferring to an electorate that you feel is more knowledgeable. For example, I will almost always abstain from voting for judgeships or DAs (I live in NYC); I have absolutely no means by which to judge the performance or resumes of these individuals except in very rare circumstances.