Spike: what use is there voting when there isn't anyone worth a vote to even vote for.. brown the crook Whitman the ceo neither are worth the time and neither should run this state either way were fucked even more so is brown wins hes fucked this state up once before.
9 hours ago · Comment · Like
Ronnie: likes this.
Ronnie: It's bullshit lol.. why I don't vote.. either way you end up with crap
9 hours ago · Like
Spike: agreed
9 hours ago · Like
Ronnie: Yup.. I was planning on voting when I came of age but eh.. all bad.. realised its a waste of time
8 hours ago · Like
Spike: yep yep just lookat all the crooks in office already.
8 hours ago · Like
Tabitha: You can't whine if you didn't have a say in who got voted in.
8 hours ago · Like
Spike: helli voted someone other then the 2 idiots like they will ever win o.0 so cants ay anything about that tabitha. as it look like one of these 2 morons are gonna win.
8 hours ago · Like
Spike: i didn't see who did through.
8 hours ago · Like
Lucid: I researched them all The Green party candidate was the best one. The reason the Red's or Blues always win is because people are too cowardly to vote outside the two-party system.
8 hours ago · Like · 1 person
Spike: agreed lol
8 hours ago · Like
Tabitha: See? That's what I'm talking about. If everybody actually voted for the best choice, even if it's the lesser of two (or three) evils, you still had a voice in it. If you don't vote, then you're making a statement that you seriously don't care who's in office and you'll suffer with the consequences. The reason why bigger names get voted into office, is because they'll agree with ONE major viewpoint, or, as I saw in the last elections, they vote that way because that's what their friends were voting for. It's like high school peer pressure. People don't have to get into politics to vote either, basically (though not realistically) they just need to know what each individual or proposition stands for. It pisses me off when people are whining about who's in office, and they didn't even vote. If you don't like something then do something about it. Quit your moaning to anybody who'll listen. Grah!!!
7 hours ago · Like
Darren: Or you can argue the opposite: if you don't vote, you can't be held responsible for the shortcomings of whoever gets voted in.
2 hours ago · Like
Tabitha: That makes no sense at all. How can you be held responsible for a person you may or may not have voted for? That's why votes are casted the way they are. Privately. It's nobodies business WHO you vote for. If we went by your logic, however, you didn't vote, you'd be held responsible for not getting the other party voted in. Either way youre being held responsible for your own shortcomings in opinion.
about an hour ago · Like
Darren: Not voting isn't a shortcoming.
about an hour ago · Like
Darren: Also, saying that someone who doesn't vote makes a statement that they don't care is the logical fallacy of Projection.
about an hour ago · Like
Tabitha: Not voting is a lack of caring how much the government controls your life, and a lack of caring of people who fought to give you the privilege to vote, and to keep the privilege to choose not to vote. Honestly, not voting seems like a lack of appreciation for what happens on a larger scale in this country, to me. As I said before, you don't wanna vote? Fine, don't vote. But don't let me hear you complaining about laws that did or didn't pass or people who are in power.
about an hour ago · Like
Darren: Again, that's projection. The people who fought for the right to vote were fighting for the sake of democracy. If someone believes the voting system is unjust and chooses not to vote as a form of civil disobedience, then they would be doing that for the sake of democracy as well.
59 minutes ago · Like
Tabitha: With that in mind, Not voting would hurt the people more than the government. Let's put this on a smaller scale to make my point. 5 people vote for A, 6 people vote for B and 4 people vote for C. 3 people didn't vote for "various reasons". A and B are both evil schmucks who get funding from big corporations. C is meh, not as evil, but wasn't backed by a multimillion dollar company. If those 3 people had voted, it could have been anyone.

At least choose to have a voice.
46 minutes ago · Like
Darren: I don't see how civil disobedience can be likened to not having a voice considering what it's achieved in the past.
(This is my last post here for the sake of not wanting to spam any further.)
28 minutes ago · Like
Tabitha: Actually, if you keep the percentage of people registered to vote who come out to vote (something like less than 65% turnout? Can anybody check that? Cuz it seems low to me) in mind, my scale should have closer to 8 people who didn't vote. so all those people who chose to not vote, just allowed somebody, who may or may not be good for the job, to take over a position of power. How does civil disobedience by not voting help as long as somebody votes? Because there will always be somebody who will vote so long as somebody is running for an office. Because even the person running would vote.
15 minutes ago · Like