4 ms·

Yeah, it's unfortunate that this whole abortion thing came up and all the Republicans had to choose between scaring all the women in their lives or flip floppin

Yeah, it's unfortunate that this whole abortion thing came up and all the Republicans had to choose between scaring all the women in their lives or flip flopping, but the party leadership have been trying to divide everyone on mortality issues for years. No idea who to vote for anymore :(

SllX 4y ago
The easy answer is if you don’t have anyone you want to vote for: don’t. I still vote, but much more selectively and I retired the belief I used to have that if you don’t vote you can’t complain. I have priorities, and I know for a fact there isn’t another human being on this planet, let alone one in my general locality that would match my voting preferences perfectly. Nothing wrong with prioritizing because the best you can hope for is good enough for government work.
- bradknowles 4y ago
  Choosing not to vote is, in and of itself, a form of voting. Only in this case, you are actively abdicating the right to make a choice, and therefore by default you are choosing to vote for the worst possible outcome. I don't care what party you are in, or what person(s) you would vote for. You can violently disagree with me on any of those topics. But you should at least get out there and cast your vote.
  - SllX 4y ago
    Incorrect. This is a lie we tell other people to guilt them into voting because if we can at least get them to a ballot box we can maybe also get them to at least partially vote for our preferred set of outcomes; it’s not actually true. Not voting is simply not voting: abstaining from making a choice or making the choice to not make a choice if you prefer, and how someone exercises their voting power and how much is a personal choice. Not voting is at worst, voting for whoever actually won in a given election. In my case I live in a single-party county in a single-party State. So voting one of two ways is either wasted ink on the winner or a protest vote for the loser and I’ll sometimes do it anyway, but when the winner is going to be same officeholder who has held office for 30 years and won with 80% of the vote last time, it’s definitely more of an emotional exercise than a rational one no matter how you voted, and this will only be subject to change once that person retires. There was also one office where the incumbent was running unopposed (and has been for years) so I stopped wasting the ink. Given how voting differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, everyone has their own calculus for voting so knock off the patronizing propaganda. If it makes you feel better, I at least partially fill out my 10 page ballots packed with offices across three or more elections with four or five different kinds of voting methods, plus State and local ballot initiatives, but only to the degree that I am satisfied with it or can be satisfied with it, and that’s all that is really necessary.

SllX 4y ago

The easy answer is if you don’t have anyone you want to vote for: don’t. I still vote, but much more selectively and I retired the belief I used to have that if you don’t vote you can’t complain. I have priorities, and I know for a fact there isn’t another human being on this planet, let alone one in my general locality that would match my voting preferences perfectly. Nothing wrong with prioritizing because the best you can hope for is good enough for government work.

bradknowles 4y ago
Choosing not to vote is, in and of itself, a form of voting. Only in this case, you are actively abdicating the right to make a choice, and therefore by default you are choosing to vote for the worst possible outcome. I don't care what party you are in, or what person(s) you would vote for. You can violently disagree with me on any of those topics. But you should at least get out there and cast your vote.
- SllX 4y ago
  Incorrect. This is a lie we tell other people to guilt them into voting because if we can at least get them to a ballot box we can maybe also get them to at least partially vote for our preferred set of outcomes; it’s not actually true. Not voting is simply not voting: abstaining from making a choice or making the choice to not make a choice if you prefer, and how someone exercises their voting power and how much is a personal choice. Not voting is at worst, voting for whoever actually won in a given election. In my case I live in a single-party county in a single-party State. So voting one of two ways is either wasted ink on the winner or a protest vote for the loser and I’ll sometimes do it anyway, but when the winner is going to be same officeholder who has held office for 30 years and won with 80% of the vote last time, it’s definitely more of an emotional exercise than a rational one no matter how you voted, and this will only be subject to change once that person retires. There was also one office where the incumbent was running unopposed (and has been for years) so I stopped wasting the ink. Given how voting differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, everyone has their own calculus for voting so knock off the patronizing propaganda. If it makes you feel better, I at least partially fill out my 10 page ballots packed with offices across three or more elections with four or five different kinds of voting methods, plus State and local ballot initiatives, but only to the degree that I am satisfied with it or can be satisfied with it, and that’s all that is really necessary.