
Are you more likely to cast the deciding vote or die on your way to the polls? - yummyfajitas
http://www.jeremyscheff.com/2012/09/vote-and-die/
======
sliverstorm
This is one of those things I wish I had a good answer for. People try to make
that point, "my vote will never be the swing vote". Yet it is intuitively
obvious that if nobody votes, or if only the really motivated people vote,
results will not reflect the constituency. Unfortunately I don't know how to
argue it on an individual basis.

~~~
zenogais
Perhaps this points towards a larger scale failure in modern forms of
"representative" democracy. Since opting out is the only alternative to
arbitrarily picking between unsatisfying options - there's no "none of the
above" box on a ballot sheet - it makes sense that voting becomes skewed
towards those special interest groups irrationally motivated enough to
actually vote. Notice that based on this evidence not voting is actually an
entirely rational decision.

~~~
sliverstorm
_there 's no "none of the above" box on a ballot sheet_

I find myself wondering if you've voted before. You can write in anyone you
like.

~~~
zenogais
Legitimate thing to wonder I suppose, also a decent ad hominem. I'll elaborate
on my point:

You are always forced to make a choice - you can write in whomever you want,
but you cannot opt to suspend the process and await alternatives. Your
expression must always be in the positive, and never in the negative. The
implicit attitude is "either offer an alternative or don't vote at all" \- so
many people opt not to vote.

For myself my attitude is something like: There seems to be a root problem
within the political process. I don't know what it is. It seems to be rarely
talked about. The options presented seem to be within a very narrow and
oversimplified spectrum that ignores ambiguity and complexity of any kind.
Rather than pick between a bunch of things I don't want or agree with I'll
just not vote. Some people choose to vote under these circumstances citing the
cynical position of "choosing between the lesser of two evils". I don't.

~~~
sliverstorm
_you can write in whomever you want, but you cannot opt to suspend the process
and await alternatives_

Ah, it was not clear you meant, an option to reject the candidates and hold
another election.

 _also a decent ad hominem_

Aww, shucks :)

------
r00fus
Rebuttal via recent news [1]. The key here is down ticket races, especially
off-cycle, your vote has a big impact.

"The razor-thin margin between Herring and Obenshain, which has fluctuated
consistently since Election Day, stood Wednesday morning with Herring carrying
a 106-vote lead on his opponent."

Given VA's election turnout (for this seat) of 2M voters (only 25% of the
population of 8.7M), this is a hairline-thin vote split. Electoral history in
the USA is rife with these kinds of very small splits. See MN: Coleman vs.
Franken, for example.

[1] [http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/11/va-attorney-general-
rac...](http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/11/va-attorney-general-race-herring-
s-lead-slips-over-obenshain-96784.html)

~~~
baddox
106 votes is still enough that your vote wouldn't have changed the outcome.
Even a 2 vote spread means it wouldn't have been worth your time.

------
gclaramunt
The electoral college is the crappiest form of democracy I know. (I find
ironic that the US presents itself as "the champion of democracy" with that
system) but if you don't vote you relinquish your right to decide. (and your
right to complain too)

------
carsongross
Recommended:

[http://www.amazon.com/Democracy-The-God-That-Failed-
Economic...](http://www.amazon.com/Democracy-The-God-That-Failed-
Economics/dp/0765808684)

~~~
AndrewKemendo
That's kind of an extreme leap. I read this back in 2005 and it impacted my
thinking a lot. After delving deeply into anarcho-capitalism and the whole
"Mises" thing however it's very much a long shot political philosophy that
doesn't seem to understand how humans work - typical then of Economists (Full
disclosure my BS was in Economics).

I would instead recommend Bryan Caplan's "The myth of the rational voter."

~~~
carsongross
I'd say that the anarcho-capitalists have a better conception of how
individual humans work than any of the current economic schools. At least they
don't pretend to understand how humans value things: value is subjective.

I agree, however, that anarcho-capitalism is a long shot politically, and I'm
not particularly satisfied with how they address externalities like pollution
or common services like law enforcement.

I've settled on parvumianism (to coin a neologisim): in favor of small
political units in which the appropriate political mechanism can be chosen and
meaningfully consented to.

------
Thiz
Buy a lottery ticket on your way back from the polls.

That way you have a higher chance of changing your life.

