4 ms·
While you are 100% right, this is irrelevant to the argument. As a voter you only have 1 single vote. You are using the word "you" in the plural sense. voter !=
by jfornear 18y ago
While you are 100% right, this is irrelevant to the argument. As a voter you only have 1 single vote. You are using the word "you" in the plural sense. voter != demographic, voter < demographic
- emmett 18y agoThe point is that your vote adds a (very small) incremental value; the sole value is not that it might decide the election.
- jfornear 18y agoWhat value does your single vote add? In regards to this argument, a single vote has no value because the outcome of a single mandate election of this scale is never determined by 1 single vote. The outcome would remain the same with or without your vote. That is the point. You bring up issues and demographics. Same rule applies. The attention given to your demographic is never affected by 1 single vote unless it is the single vote that causes the politician to focus attention or turn his/her back. This is obviously a gray area that can't be measured.
- dhs 18y agoTo me, the primary value of my individual vote is its role in keeping the democratic process running. If I wouldn't vote, I would contribute to undermining the system I support. Contrastingly, the less other people vote, the more important my own vote becomes; if I were a democracy's last voter, I would make all the difference. What's not to like?
- emmett 18y agoYou say it "can't be measured", but of course it can be. Say there are 10 million people in your demographic; then your vote makes your demographic 0.0001% bigger and shifts it correspondingly slightly towards your political position. That's not nothing, that's a small effect. In aggregate, it has a large effect, which corresponds exactly to the sum of the small effects.