5 ms·

Voting is not a civic duty. I have every right NOT to vote. It's my voice and I can use it as I please. Forcing me into a ballot box to pick between two awfu

Voting is not a civic duty. I have every right NOT to vote. It's my voice and I can use it as I please. Forcing me into a ballot box to pick between two awful choices is not civilized.

tombert 2y ago
I didn't force you to do anything. No one did. I'm just judging you.
- timewizard 2y ago
  > I'm just judging you. Ah so your sense of civics is that easy to depart with? I take it you think no one could judge you for your position?
  - tombert 2y ago
    > Ah so your sense of civics is that easy to depart with? I don't really agree with the sentiment of "be nice to people doing stupid stuff" that seems to permeate around here, so it's not really a "gotcha" to point out that I'm being a judgmental asshole. > I take it you think no one could judge you for your position? I don't give a shit if people judge me. I have my opinions. You're free to think that position is stupid if you want. There's eight billion other people on this planet, there's always going to be people who think my opinions are stupid. I think yours is stupid. It's a beautiful system.
    - timewizard 2y ago
      > I don't really agree with the sentiment of "be nice to people doing stupid stuff" What is your goal? > I don't give a shit if people judge me. I have my opinions. People would hear more of them if they weren't so coarse. Be generous. You'd might be surprised what you're missing.
      - tombert 2y ago
        I don’t really have a “goal”. I don’t even know that I agree with the conclusion that people would hear more of my opinions if I were nicer, but even if I grant that, I also don’t particularly care if my opinions have reach. I was going to type up a lecture to why I think it’s dumb to not vote, but I am sure you’ve heard it before, and frankly even if I had the most eloquent and amazing argument ever I doubt that it would change your opinion on this, so I can’t really be bothered.
- Afforess 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - tombert 2y ago
    How does this make me a fascist? I am a fascist for thinking you’re dumb if you were allowed to vote and didn’t? I can’t judge someone for something without being called a fascist? I think we have some very different definitions of words here.
amanaplanacanal 2y ago
As a wise man once said, there may not be anybody you are excited to vote for, but there is almost certainly somebody you would like to vote against.
- timewizard 2y ago
  I'd rather have more than 2 parties. You can vote against people. To me that's a tacit admission that you're accepting the proffer. As there's no way on your vote to indicate that it's a vote of protest vs. a vote of support. The candidate you vote for will see no difference. You'll have reduced your already meager position even further. I do not accept this. I mean if you want to get into the anti-democratic nature of the Unit Rule next I'd be happy to oblige you. Your position is not automatically "good" just because school and MTV told you it was.
  - sitkack 2y ago
    You should have to vote, you just don't have to vote for anyone. A blank ballot is still a vote. But you have to show up.
  - magicalhippo 2y ago
    What if you could cast a negative vote? That is, you could either vote for one candidate, or against one candidate.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - timewizard 2y ago
      Technically I'd be voting against both. If enough people do this then the candidates should be thrown out and a new election held. This would lead to insane chaos but if everyone where an honest actor it could be beautiful.
  - unethical_ban 2y ago
    A civic duty is not a legal duty. You have the legal right not to vote. My opinion is you are failing your government and your own interests when you don't vote. I agree that plurality voting is bad. We should have a system where candidates are ranked, so voter sentiment is better expressed and more than two candidates have a chance at winning. The system we have now needs to be worked, until we get a new system. If you dislike all options equally, then vote for someone else as a protest. If you have a preference of one major candidate over the other, it is in your interest to express that. Sitting at home and doing nothing is the worst. I challenge you to at least research ranked-pair or ranked choice voting (or any alternative form of voting) and write your city councilman about it. Or contact a voting reform organization to ask how you can help change your city.
someothherguyy 2y ago
In non-individualist thought, voting might be seen as a ethical duty to protect fellow citizens from harm.
charlie90 2y ago
If you dont like any of the candidates, run yourself. Choosing to do nothing is declaring that you dont care.

Voting is not a civic duty. I have every right NOT to vote. It's my voice and I can use it as I please. Forcing me into a ballot box to pick between two awful choices is not civilized.

tombert 2y ago

I didn't force you to do anything. No one did. I'm just judging you.

timewizard 2y ago
> I'm just judging you. Ah so your sense of civics is that easy to depart with? I take it you think no one could judge you for your position?
- tombert 2y ago
  > Ah so your sense of civics is that easy to depart with? I don't really agree with the sentiment of "be nice to people doing stupid stuff" that seems to permeate around here, so it's not really a "gotcha" to point out that I'm being a judgmental asshole. > I take it you think no one could judge you for your position? I don't give a shit if people judge me. I have my opinions. You're free to think that position is stupid if you want. There's eight billion other people on this planet, there's always going to be people who think my opinions are stupid. I think yours is stupid. It's a beautiful system.
  - timewizard 2y ago
    > I don't really agree with the sentiment of "be nice to people doing stupid stuff" What is your goal? > I don't give a shit if people judge me. I have my opinions. People would hear more of them if they weren't so coarse. Be generous. You'd might be surprised what you're missing.
    - tombert 2y ago
      I don’t really have a “goal”. I don’t even know that I agree with the conclusion that people would hear more of my opinions if I were nicer, but even if I grant that, I also don’t particularly care if my opinions have reach. I was going to type up a lecture to why I think it’s dumb to not vote, but I am sure you’ve heard it before, and frankly even if I had the most eloquent and amazing argument ever I doubt that it would change your opinion on this, so I can’t really be bothered.
Afforess 2y ago
[flagged]
- tombert 2y ago
  How does this make me a fascist? I am a fascist for thinking you’re dumb if you were allowed to vote and didn’t? I can’t judge someone for something without being called a fascist? I think we have some very different definitions of words here.

amanaplanacanal 2y ago

As a wise man once said, there may not be anybody you are excited to vote for, but there is almost certainly somebody you would like to vote against.

timewizard 2y ago
I'd rather have more than 2 parties. You can vote against people. To me that's a tacit admission that you're accepting the proffer. As there's no way on your vote to indicate that it's a vote of protest vs. a vote of support. The candidate you vote for will see no difference. You'll have reduced your already meager position even further. I do not accept this. I mean if you want to get into the anti-democratic nature of the Unit Rule next I'd be happy to oblige you. Your position is not automatically "good" just because school and MTV told you it was.
- sitkack 2y ago
  You should have to vote, you just don't have to vote for anyone. A blank ballot is still a vote. But you have to show up.
- magicalhippo 2y ago
  What if you could cast a negative vote? That is, you could either vote for one candidate, or against one candidate.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - timewizard 2y ago
    Technically I'd be voting against both. If enough people do this then the candidates should be thrown out and a new election held. This would lead to insane chaos but if everyone where an honest actor it could be beautiful.
- unethical_ban 2y ago
  A civic duty is not a legal duty. You have the legal right not to vote. My opinion is you are failing your government and your own interests when you don't vote. I agree that plurality voting is bad. We should have a system where candidates are ranked, so voter sentiment is better expressed and more than two candidates have a chance at winning. The system we have now needs to be worked, until we get a new system. If you dislike all options equally, then vote for someone else as a protest. If you have a preference of one major candidate over the other, it is in your interest to express that. Sitting at home and doing nothing is the worst. I challenge you to at least research ranked-pair or ranked choice voting (or any alternative form of voting) and write your city councilman about it. Or contact a voting reform organization to ask how you can help change your city.

someothherguyy 2y ago

In non-individualist thought, voting might be seen as a ethical duty to protect fellow citizens from harm.

charlie90 2y ago

If you dont like any of the candidates, run yourself. Choosing to do nothing is declaring that you dont care.