Has America Given Up?

[Frigidus]

So, a quick glance at the popular vote numbers for the last two presidential elections shows me that somewhere between 9 and 10 million Americans decided to just not vote this time around. Will those 10 million vote again in the future, or have they just stopped giving a shit? What do you guys think?

The Numbers:
2008 Popular Vote: 69,456,897 for Obama, 59,934,814 for McCain
2012 Popular Vote: 61,811,225 for Obama, 58,580,193 for Romney

Now, someone might ask why I'm not including third party and write in votes. The answer to that is that I'm lazy. Deal with it.

Edit: Just realized my poll disenfranchised non-Americans, so I added an option for you.

[Phatscotty]

well, for one, the election of 2008 was much more "historic"

and two, it looks like 10 times more Democrats have given up than Republicans

btw, they don't count the write ins. If Ron Paul got the nomination, I bet more people would have voted

I will give you that the leaders of America seem to have given up. The dollar is going to crash soon, and they know it, and they are trying to get as much for themselves as they can while they can. The future has already been sold out along the lines of how much we borrow and spend, and seemingly are willing to borrow and spend more, under this premise I would agree more and more American's are like "we're screwed anyways, let's just spend to the moon and get the big crash over with".

Insanity and ignorance are also acceptable excuses

[aad0906]

I guess if you're in New York you may feel your vote isn't necessary because New York is going to the Democrats anyway. 2 choices isn't really much choice.

[Funkyterrance]

I, for one, haven't.
I've been contemplating the lack of turnout and have come to the conclusion that these people are just lazy. There's almost always a lesser of two evils. That being said, it stands to reason that their vote would reflect this and therefore I'd prefer they didn't vote anyway.
I didn't vote in the poll because it was too one-sided.

[Dukasaur]

I, for one, haven't.
I've been contemplating the lack of turnout and have come to the conclusion that these people are just lazy. There's almost always a lesser of two evils. That being said, it stands to reason that their vote would reflect this and therefore I'd prefer they didn't vote anyway.
I didn't vote in the poll because it was too one-sided.

The lesser of two evils is still evil.

When all the choices available are unpalatable, it is perfectly reasonable to say "I won't dignify this corrupt collection of gangsters by participating in their charade."

And no, I'm not one of those people who doesn't vote. I always do vote, and I always find some rationale for why I picked Scumbag D over Scumbags A, B, and C. But that's my choice, and I won't disrespect those who choose not to participate at all. Nothing "lazy" about wanting to stay clean.

[Funkyterrance]

I, for one, haven't.
I've been contemplating the lack of turnout and have come to the conclusion that these people are just lazy. There's almost always a lesser of two evils. That being said, it stands to reason that their vote would reflect this and therefore I'd prefer they didn't vote anyway.
I didn't vote in the poll because it was too one-sided.

The lesser of two evils is still evil.

When all the choices available are unpalatable, it is perfectly reasonable to say "I won't dignify this corrupt collection of gangsters by participating in their charade."

And no, I'm not one of those people who doesn't vote. I always do vote, and I always find some rationale for why I picked Scumbag D over Scumbags A, B, and C. But that's my choice, and I won't disrespect those who choose not to participate at all. Nothing "lazy" about wanting to stay clean.

Just like me, you are projecting. Hard to say for sure the reasons behind the low turnout but we can only suppose. As far as staying clean, you can always use your better judgement. Therefore I think my assessment may be more likely.

[thegreekdog]

I suspect most of the people who didn't vote are self-disenfranchised (or whatever) - In other words, they had no interest in voting because they are lazy or too busy or whatever.

Ironically, the people that did vote are probably disenfranchised. For example, my wife voted for Romney. I voted for Gary Johnson. Our state was solidly Democrat, so my vote really didn't count, right? All the electoral votes for my state went to Obama; not proportional.

[patches70]

America is over $16 trillion in debt. The “official” unemployment rate still hovers around 8%.

Our federal government claims the right to spy on American citizens, indefinitely detain them, and even assassinate them without trial.

Domestic drones fly over the country for civilian surveillance.

Twelve million fewer Americans voted in 2012 than in 2008, yet political pundits scratch their heads.

It’s not hard to see why, though.

To go along with endorsing a never-ending policy of bailouts, “stimulus packages,” and foreign military adventurism, the establishment of neither major party questions the assaults on Americans’ liberties I’ve named above.

As my campaign showed, the American people are fed up. Many realized heading into Tuesday that regardless of who won the presidential election, the status quo would be the real victor.

GOP leadership is now questioning why they didn’t perform better.

They’re looking at demographic changes in the United States and implying minorities can only be brought into the party by loudly advocating for abandoning what little remains of their limited government platform and endorsing more statist policies.

My presidential campaign proved that standing for freedom brings people together.

Liberty is popular – regardless of race, religion, or creed.

As long as the GOP establishment continues to not only reject the liberty message, but actively drive away the young, diverse coalition that supports those principles, it will see results similar to Tuesday’s outcome.

A renewed respect for liberty is the only way forward for the Republican Party and for our country.

I urge all my Republican colleagues to join the liberty movement in fighting for a brighter future.- Ron Paul
(emphasis mine)

[Metsfanmax]

When all the choices available are unpalatable, it is perfectly reasonable to say "I won't dignify this corrupt collection of gangsters by participating in their charade."

In what way is the process of voting "dignifying" any of the candidates? The process of voting is dignifying your right to live in a democratic state.

[saxitoxin]

When all the choices available are unpalatable, it is perfectly reasonable to say "I won't dignify this corrupt collection of gangsters by participating in their charade."

In what way is the process of voting "dignifying" any of the candidates? The process of voting is dignifying your right to live in a democratic state.

By engaging in the act of voting you have given your consent to be bound by the results of the election and given your individual recognition to the power structure that has organized the election. Punching a ballot is the same as clicking "yes" to the Terms of Service when signing up to Conquer Club.

In a proper system of government, anytime voter turnout is less than 50% a constitutional convention would immediately be called.

[Metsfanmax]

When all the choices available are unpalatable, it is perfectly reasonable to say "I won't dignify this corrupt collection of gangsters by participating in their charade."

In what way is the process of voting "dignifying" any of the candidates? The process of voting is dignifying your right to live in a democratic state.

By engaging in the act of voting you have given your consent to be bound by the results of the election and given your individual recognition to the power structure that has organized the election. Punching a ballot is the same as clicking "yes" to the Terms of Service when signing up to Conquer Club.

In a proper system of government, anytime voter turnout is less than 50% a constitutional convention would immediately be called.

I disagree. By the act of living inside the geographical boundaries of the U.S.A. you give your consent to be bound by the results of the election. You can't just freeload off the benefits that are derived from living in a stable society, and cherry pick which parts of the system you think are legitimate.

[Phatscotty]

Where in thee blue hell do your values and your principles come from Mets? Mind sharing?

Hitler's youth comment withheld.

[saxitoxin]

When all the choices available are unpalatable, it is perfectly reasonable to say "I won't dignify this corrupt collection of gangsters by participating in their charade."

In what way is the process of voting "dignifying" any of the candidates? The process of voting is dignifying your right to live in a democratic state.

By engaging in the act of voting you have given your consent to be bound by the results of the election and given your individual recognition to the power structure that has organized the election. Punching a ballot is the same as clicking "yes" to the Terms of Service when signing up to Conquer Club.

In a proper system of government, anytime voter turnout is less than 50% a constitutional convention would immediately be called.

I disagree. By the act of living inside the geographical boundaries of the U.S.A. you give your consent to be bound by the results of the election. You can't just freeload off the benefits that are derived from living in a stable society, and cherry pick which parts of the system you think are legitimate.

That's a false dilemma that presupposes you have unrestricted freedom to move outside the geographical boundaries of the USA when it suits you. Your ability to quit the United States and move to Italy depends on whether the Italian government decides to accept your immigration application.

[Metsfanmax]

When all the choices available are unpalatable, it is perfectly reasonable to say "I won't dignify this corrupt collection of gangsters by participating in their charade."

In what way is the process of voting "dignifying" any of the candidates? The process of voting is dignifying your right to live in a democratic state.

By engaging in the act of voting you have given your consent to be bound by the results of the election and given your individual recognition to the power structure that has organized the election. Punching a ballot is the same as clicking "yes" to the Terms of Service when signing up to Conquer Club.

In a proper system of government, anytime voter turnout is less than 50% a constitutional convention would immediately be called.

I disagree. By the act of living inside the geographical boundaries of the U.S.A. you give your consent to be bound by the results of the election. You can't just freeload off the benefits that are derived from living in a stable society, and cherry pick which parts of the system you think are legitimate.

That's a false dilemma that presupposes you have unrestricted freedom to move outside the geographical boundaries of the USA when it suits you. Your ability to quit the United States and move to Italy depends on whether the Italian government decides to accept your immigration application.

There's a difference between pure anarchists and freeloaders. The former do face a real problem; it is actually pragmatically difficult to leave the geopolitical boundaries of a given state without entering the boundaries of another one. That being said, what I'm talking about isn't in regard to anarchists; it applies to people who believe they are, and desire to be, citizens of the U.S.A. People who desire to be part of the structure that comprises this country automatically give consent to the governmental structure. Whether or not you vote has no bearing on whether you have given consent to the legitimacy of the structure. What I'm saying is you can't legitimately take advantage of such benefits as a police force to maintain order, while at the same time claim the system is illegitimate. Your actions speak louder than your words.

Phatscotty: this is standard social contract theory. It's not a particularly unique or new argument.

[Funkyterrance]

By engaging in the act of voting you have given your consent to be bound by the results of the election and given your individual recognition to the power structure that has organized the election. Punching a ballot is the same as clicking "yes" to the Terms of Service when signing up to Conquer Club.

In a proper system of government, anytime voter turnout is less than 50% a constitutional convention would immediately be called.

I agree with mets that its not the casting of your ballot that is agreeing to the terms of service but living in the US. Your vote is a privilege. If you so choose to pass on this privilege you no less agree to the outcome. Not voting out of principle is the adult version of sitting out the game with your arms crossed. The game will continue and those playing will be more or less unaffected by your silent protest.