Voting Worthless?

[VtPC83]

I'm sure this poll will defintely skew towards the 'no' answer with most lambasting me for not being responsible and voting... telling me I can't complain if I don't vote... voting is what our system is all about.

What I am saying is that voting is broken, not necessarily the method in which it is done (needs serious work though), but with the ONLY people we have as choices. I would rather not vote than vote for anyone currently in office (or trying to get into office). It is clear no-one, on EITHER side, has anyone's best interests in heart besides their own.

I am a young person and am in agreement with others around the world apparently.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44697094/ns/world_news-the_new_york_times/

Edit - YES, I know, it is rather ironic I am polling people on this question.

 

[PokerGuy]

Voting is not worthless per se, but the system is now set up such that your choices come down to two sets of idiots, neither one of which cares about you or the welfare of the country.

I don't know how the system can be fixed either, it's been co-opted from within.

 

[MovingTarget]

I voted no from a philosophical standpoint, but your argument and article lack one thing that would make this much more interesting/relevant: math.

 

[Ausm]

Voting is not worthless but the deck is definately stacked against the average person since Corporation are people they may be able to get to vote the next time the GOP gets into power.

 

[Jaskalas]

Voting is not worthless per se, but the system is now set up such that your choices come down to two sets of idiots, neither one of which cares about you or the welfare of the country.

I don't know how the system can be fixed either, it's been co-opted from within.

Absolutely true.

Yet I still had to vote no, as the people of this country could choose to fix it at anytime. They won't, but the opportunity is still available. Voting is useful, we're just not smart enough to make use of it.

What we need is for both parties to realize their established leaders are corrupted and the only solution is to vote against them. You MUST risk the election by standing on your principles, or your government will remain corrupt. The electable men who play to the corporate middle are the corrupt ones.

The elected leaders could stand some humility, and recognize that they serve us. They need to abandon a one size fits all policy and stop trying to play dictator for 310 million people. Grant power to the states to choose their own policies. There is room in this country for both sides to get everything they want, you just have to let the other half go.

Let them live free, and you too shall be free. Failing that our system is on course for a bloody revolt. At present we appear to be deadlocked on guaranteeing this outcome, but again, voting COULD fix it. It's just not going to.

Our people appear to be power hungry and refuse to live and let live.

 

[Jaskalas]

Voting is not worthless but the deck is definately stacked against the average person since Corporation are people they may be able to get to vote the next time the GOP gets into power.

Obama has been their buddy, friend, and pal, but let's not mention that. It might hurt your feelings.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Of course young people think voting is worthless. They are unmotivated, poorly educated, and lack a life experience to give them any perspective. Many want to sit around all day smoking pot playing CoD and have the world hand them everything on a silver platter. They think sacrifice means cutting down from 60 hours of CoD a week to 55. They think hard work means having to show up before 9:30 AM.

Very few young people I know have ever really been challenged or asked to do much of anything for themselves. I'm nearing 40 years old and I would even include myself in that to some extent - If not for some tragedy in my life I would probably also have been given almost everything I need from my parents. Unfortunately losing a parent at a young age changed that, and while I would do anything to get my father back I think the positive impact of that was I learned to value earning money, working for what I wanted, and being self reliant.

So it doesn't surprise me that young people feel voting is stupid. They want to be able to vote in a person that will pay their mortgage, their gas, give them free education and transportation, and do it all with no consequences, downsides, or sacrifice.

Am I right? :sneaky:

 

[Ausm]

Obama has been their buddy, friend, and pal, but let's not mention that. It might hurt your feelings.

If this is the case wouldn't the Repugs in Congress adore him instead relentlessly beating him like a rented mule?

 

[fskimospy]

Yes, from a mathematical perspective voting on an individual basis is completely and utterly worthless. It has nothing to do with the parties, simply with the numbers of votes cast and the fact that our system is winner take all.

The odds of you actually affecting an election with your vote are so infinitesimally small that your time would be better spent doing literally almost anything else. This is actually a continuing point of confusion for political scientists, because rational models lead to no one ever voting.

EDIT: To be clear, there is nothing special about this moment in history. Voting has basically always been worthless for individuals in pluralistic democracies.

 

[VtPC83]

So it doesn't surprise me that young people feel voting is stupid. They want to be able to vote in a person that will pay their mortgage, their gas, give them free education and transportation, and do it all with no consequences, downsides, or sacrifice.

I have to classify young people - people who are 22 - 28, who are working in full-time jobs. I would say 90% of everyone below that doesn't count and honestly isn't informed enough to know who they should vote for based on their beliefs (or care enough). I was in college, quite a while back, and heard a number of kids say that their dorm/school life was very comparable to 'real' life. That scared me so I am excluding college kids.


I understand what you are saying regarding younger people feeling entitled but I don't think that is completely true. You have to remember, we younger folks have been told, by EVERYONE (not just parents, but teachers, politicians, etc) since we were young kids that we would be living in the most prosperous age and would be able to have what we wanted. Now it is all falling down around us because of politicians. It is very likely I will be working far past 65, probably until I am 80 given the state of social security (or lack thereof), stock markets and the government.

I'm not saying that is an excuse but I am saying it has impacted our view of the world.

Edit- One more thing, I said voting was worthless, not stupid. Voting is far from stupid and is a great thing if it worked correctly.

 

[VtPC83]

In this context, I am ignoring the valid point you make eskim. I agree that voting as an individual makes no sense and doesn't have any real impact but that is another discussion.

 

[fskimospy]

In this context, I am ignoring the valid point you make eskim. I agree that voting as an individual makes no sense and doesn't have any real impact but that is another discussion.

I also think that the Constitution all but forces a two party system by virtue of its structure. (winner take all systems are heavily weighted towards two parties) In any country of 300 million people that has to be distilled down to just two parties, the odds of any party actually representing you well are pretty small. I don't think this is unique to our time in history other than perhaps though population size, it's just an unfortunate part of the Constitution that the founding fathers screwed up.

Almost all people are self interested, and to expect politicians not to be is pretty unrealistic I think. This also isn't unique to our time, politicians have always been this way and always will be. The one good part about democracy is that it created incentives for good public policy as opposed to other systems. Sure it doesn't always work out that way, but like I said before I don't think that's unique to now either.

 

[Fear No Evil]

I have to classify young people - people who are 22 - 28, who are working in full-time jobs. I would say 90% of everyone below that doesn't count and honestly isn't informed enough to know who they should vote for based on their beliefs (or care enough). I was in college, quite a while back, and heard a number of kids say that their dorm/school life was very comparable to 'real' life. That scared me so I am excluding college kids.


I understand what you are saying regarding younger people feeling entitled but I don't think that is completely true. You have to remember, we younger folks have been told, by EVERYONE (not just parents, but teachers, politicians, etc) since we were young kids that we would be living in the most prosperous age and would be able to have what we wanted. Now it is all falling down around us because of politicians. It is very likely I will be working far past 65, probably until I am 80 given the state of social security (or lack thereof), stock markets and the government.

I'm not saying that is an excuse but I am saying it has impacted our view of the world.

Edit- One more thing, I said voting was worthless, not stupid. Voting is far from stupid and is a great thing if it worked correctly.

You do make some good points. I think young people have been misled by their parents, politicians, teachers, etc to some extent. I think many people think its their right to retire at 60 and live until they are 90 without working or saving for their own retirement. What we forget is that pretty much all of our grandparents and many of our parents will all work until damn near their life expectancy.

While it sounds great that we should be able to provide free healthcare, free retirement, free medicine, etc to everyone that retires at 65 its just not a reasonable expectation giving how much longer lives are being extended and how much it costs. We've been sold into a ponzi scheme and we're starting have our eyes opened on why its not going to work.

 

[piasabird]

If you are voting to get rid of democrats like Oh'Bummer, it is of great value.

 

[Thump553]

It irritates to me that many millions of people have sacrificed (and are sacrificing) their lives and time to achieve and protect freedom for this country while there is a sizeable portion of whiners that won't take a half hour to vote "because it won't do anything"-yet the same whiners do absolutely nothing to improve the system by doing something so small as to volunteer to work for candidates they support.

If the teabaggers ever got real serious and demanded people pass a citizenship test in order to remain in this country (rather than it being a birthright) then maybe I could even support them-or at least that part of their platform.

I despise gimmies and leeches.

 

[fskimospy]

It irritates to me that many millions of people have sacrificed (and are sacrificing) their lives and time to achieve and protect freedom for this country while there is a sizeable portion of whiners that won't take a half hour to vote "because it won't do anything"-yet the same whiners do absolutely nothing to improve the system by doing something so small as to volunteer to work for candidates they support.

If the teabaggers ever got real serious and demanded people pass a citizenship test in order to remain in this country (rather than it being a birthright) then maybe I could even support them-or at least that part of their platform.

I despise gimmies and leeches.

Seriously though, from a totally objective mathematical standpoint the people who say it won't do anything are completely correct.

 

[Nebor]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/06/magazine/06freak.html?pagewanted=all

The opportunity costs incurred by voting aren't worth the time, considering one vote never makes the difference.

 

[sm625]

In the literal sense, yes. Voting to replace hopey changey puppet #47 with hopey changey puppet #48 IS worthless. However, that is not the only way you vote. Direct democracy, like voting on ballot props and things like that, is of more worth.

 

[fskimospy]

In the literal sense, yes. Voting to replace hopey changey puppet #47 with hopey changey puppet #48 IS worthless. However, that is not the only way you vote. Direct democracy, like voting on ballot props and things like that, is of more worth.

Nope, it isn't. Or to be more clear, it is of such marginally larger worth as to be indistinguishable and is still a complete waste of your time.

 

[Craig234]

Yes and no.

Voting is extremely important for the people to have power they wouldn't otherwise have through economics or politics.

The way for the powerful and wealthy interests to get the people to throw away democracy though, is to get them not to value it, which is what this corruption causes.

Many people are susceptible to bribes to give up their vote for some benefits.

Voting is useful when people can organize to back a good candidate. Having big money needed to win prevents that and limits the choices to wealthy-backed picks.

 

[woolfe9999]

The question of whether voting is "worthless" in the mathematical sense is less interesting to me than the question of why people throughout the world are losing faith in democracy at this particular moment in history. Notice we aren't the only ones who feel like our choices at the ballot box are all bad? Did political leaders throughout the democratic world suddenly become a lot worse or is it just that the world is in the grip of an economic downturn and this in our mind reflects on the quality of our leadership? I suspect it is the latter and perception > reality.

 

[VtPC83]

It irritates to me that many millions of people have sacrificed (and are sacrificing) their lives and time to achieve and protect freedom for this country while there is a sizeable portion of whiners that won't take a half hour to vote "because it won't do anything"-yet the same whiners do absolutely nothing to improve the system by doing something so small as to volunteer to work for candidates they support.

I agree with you but I think if you explained what my choices were and how those who are voted in abuse their power to those fighting and dying for my right to vote they would be just as disillusioned as I am with the people in office.

I think the moral of my thread is that the voting system could use some work yes, but right now, my vote is worthless because of the PEOPLE in office and the PEOPLE looking to get voted into office. Niether of them are worth my vote. How do you fix that? Oh, you vote... awesome. Chicken or the egg anybody?

 

[woolfe9999]

Nope, it isn't. Or to be more clear, it is of such marginally larger worth as to be indistinguishable and is still a complete waste of your time.

I don't agree that voting is a waste of time. If your objective is to influence the outcome of a particular election/ballot measure, then yes of course it is. However, the objective is the viability of the entire democratic system, and the welfare of the individual voter is directly impacted by that system. A democracy in which no one votes, or a tiny percentage vote, is a non-viable system which may as well devolve to totalitarianism. Since a given individual who decides not to "waste" his time voting on the ground that he cannot influence the outcome of the election in question cannot be certain how many of his fellow citizens will or won't follow the same logic, the rational decision is to vote to preserve the viability of democracy.

But let's hypothetically say I'm wrong, and that game theory supports your contention that "voting is a waste of time." One thing is clear: telling people that cannot be a good thing. Suppose, for example, that one group, say liberals, is culturally/intellectually more receptive to that message than another, say the tea party. Now we're getting to a place where we aren't talking about just decreasing the number of voters in general, but influencing which type of leaders we elect, and that DOES matter. So whatever the rationality of voting, telling people that voting is a waste of time is NOT rational.

 

[werepossum]

I don't think voting is useless. Both major parties are more alike than not, true; in our system of government they have to be. But there are still differences, some of which are surely important to the vast majority of people. If none of the differences are important to you, then at least you can select which candidate you think would do a better job. If the two parties' similarities are anathema to you, you can at least vote for a third party, which if nothing else moves the polity a bit in that direction.

Eskimospy makes a good point that voting individually makes no real difference, but this is true of virtually everything we do. Why clear ground when you can't live on bare ground? Why dig a trench and pour a foundation when that's not a house? Virtually everything worth doing takes substantial amounts of time and/or substantial amounts of help - why should selecting a government be any different? Just be thankful you have that opportunity to do your small bit. And don't forget the primaries; voting in primaries, and donating time and money, can have a bigger (if still small) effect on the direction of the country than does voting in the general election.

And lastly, take Fear No Evil's point about young people. There is no one person or one party we can elect that will take the effort and pain out of life. Nor would we be better off for it if we could.

 

[fskimospy]

I don't agree that voting is a waste of time. If your objective is to influence the outcome of a particular election/ballot measure, then yes of course it is. However, the objective is the viability of the entire democratic system, and the welfare of the individual voter is directly impacted by that system. A democracy in which no one votes, or a tiny percentage vote, is a non-viable system which may as well devolve to totalitarianism. Since a given individual who decides not to "waste" his time voting on the ground that he cannot influence the outcome of the election in question cannot be certain how many of his fellow citizens will or won't follow the same logic, the rational decision is to vote to preserve the viability of democracy.

But let's hypothetically say I'm wrong, and that game theory supports your contention that "voting is a waste of time." One thing is clear: telling people that cannot be a good thing. Suppose, for example, that one group, say liberals, is culturally/intellectually more receptive to that message than another, say the tea party. Now we're getting to a place where we aren't talking about just decreasing the number of voters in general, but influencing which type of leaders we elect, and that DOES matter. So whatever the rationality of voting, telling people that voting is a waste of time is NOT rational.

Game theory definitely supports the contention that voting is a waste of time, but so does just a statistical analysis. Your vote is one among millions, and it only matters if your candidate wins by one vote. Pretty unlikely.

You are right though, other people voting is very important. Speaking in game theory terms everyone's best outcome is them not voting but their candidate winning, but naturally if everyone does that we all get the worst possible outcome. (sort of like a prisoner's dilemma, but it doesn't fit exactly with millions of 'prisoners') Our best bet is to tell everyone else how important it is for them to vote while avoiding it ourselves. Of course as Nebor's article noted, there are other aspects to voting like the ones you mentioned. There's a social aspect to it, a good citizenship feeling to it, etc. If the goal is to elect a preferred candidate however, voting is irrational.

As to the point of the OP though, he seems to be talking about a feeling of alienation from our political leaders because he feels they don't represent him. (probably correctly) How can a candidate appeal to 150 million people (or so) each on an individual level and represent each of them well? I just don't think that such a thing could ever be possible, and so the flaw is not with the candidates.