
Ask HN: Are you voting? - jsherer
Today are the US Midterm Elections. Just curious... Are you voting today? If yes, where are you located? If not, why not?
======
Someone1234
Statistically there's no point in me voting. I'm in a 90% dominated (R) area.
So I won't be and I encourage others to do the same.

Democracy is real, but a state which is two party FPTP is only barely within
the definition. It is set up so there is no legitimate third choice, and even
if there was they would have no power to accomplish anything anyway.

Whatever we currently have exists to make us feel like we have just enough
choice to keep us quiet and passive, "wait for the next election" they say,
"you can change things" they lie, but statistically almost nobody in the
country has the power to perform real change (less than 10% of states, and
even in those states only a relatively small swing-district minority).

Go vote, but you've fallen into their trap. The trap of believing that US
"democracy" isn't fundamentally broken/useless. Until the baby boomers and
older literally die off the whole thing has no purpose at all (unless you
happen to be in the 1% of voters that matter).

~~~
chton
Why would participating in a broken democratic system automatically imply you
believe it isn't broken? It's all you can do to have even the tiniest amount
of influence. Sure, your vote might not be worth much now, but that influence
accumulates. It's literally the only thing you can do that has any impact at
all, but you don't want to? Refusing to participate is not going to change
anything, it's not going to fix the system.

As to your first point: "I don't vote, because not enough people vote for what
I want" is a self-defeating argument. It's a dangerous argument, too, because
it just reinforces the status quo even more. If you're unhappy with the
current numbers, the very least you can do is make your tiny part of a
percentage change.

------
michael2l
"I don't care who does the electing, so long as I get to do the nominating."
\- Boss Tweed quoted recently by Lawrence Lessig

While I believe the above statement is fundamentally true I"m still going to
vote. For me personally, I think I'm doing that as a some sort of ritual to
hold onto my belief in democracy even though I recognize that our current
system is badly broken.

------
0x5f3759df-i
I already voted early, the apathy and boasting about not voting going on here
is the exact reason our politicians such fucking idiots.

People complain that the baby boomers control politics but that's because they
are the only ones that show up to vote so their interests are met.

By not voting you are just giving a louder voice to those that do. Not voting
as a form of protest does not exclude you from the laws that are passed by the
people voted in by those that did.

I'm real fucking sick of the deafest and general negativity here on HN.

~~~
thaumaturgy
> _...the apathy and boasting about not voting going on here is the exact
> reason our politicians such idiots._

Or, alternatively, that our politicians are such idiots is the exact reason
that there's apathy and boasting about not voting.

> _People complain that the baby boomers control politics but that 's because
> they are the only ones that show up to vote so their interests are met._

Close to half of the voters in 2008 and 2012 were under the age of 45. It
still resulted in one of the most useless Congresses in history, a pointless
budget deadlock that damaged the US credit rating, increased powers of federal
surveillance, continued insane drug policy ... the only issue that might be
considered a win by the liberals of that age group is health care, and that
came at a very steep political price and arrived at the door step a jumbled,
broken mess.

Do you _really_ believe that if the voter turnout by those under 45 had been
10% or 20% higher that it would have had much of an impact on the political
process?

> _By not voting you are just giving a louder voice to those that do._

That's not how it works. The loudest of voices do not belong to voters; they
belong to blowhards career politicians and media personalities and people with
enough money to buy politicians of any party.

> _Not voting as a form of protest does not exclude you from the laws that are
> passed by the people voted in by those that did._

Maybe not, but it removes any claim to the wishes of the majority by those
that write and enforce the laws.

And by the way, except for two elections, voter turnout in the U.S. has
hovered between 70% and 80% since the 60s.

~~~
6thSigma
> And by the way, except for two elections, voter turnout in the U.S. has
> hovered between 70% and 80% since the 60s.

Where are you getting this from? I was under the impression it's closer to
50%.

~~~
thaumaturgy
Oh! I was wrong. I had gone off of a graph of voter turnout for several
different countries
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Turnout.png](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Turnout.png)
\-- it came up while searching for demographic information on voters), but I'm
colorblind, and didn't realize I was associating the wrong lines with the
wrong country. Hate when that happens.

US voter turnout has been oscillating between 50% and 65% since about 1904
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_St...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_elections)),
although there is a (very) gradual declining trend.

Thanks for catching that error.

------
thaumaturgy
"If voting changed anything, it would be illegal."

Yes, I'll be voting today, but primarily because there are some contentious
local candidates and local issues. Like most voters I'm pretty disillusioned
by the state of politics at the state and federal levels.

I'm starting to think of low voter turnouts as a quiet protest against a
broken and corrupt political process, and seen that way, I really can't in
good conscience encourage anyone else to vote.

~~~
0x5f3759df-i
There is no way to determine whether someone is not voting out of protest or
just simple laziness. That is not an effective way to protest. Voting for a
smaller party that never wins would be more effective way of protest.

A "quiet protest" has never fixed anything.

------
jpetersonmn
Yes, I'm voting. (Minnesota, 2nd district) I think voting is the bare minimum.
The real important part is to get involved in primary races to help shape who
the candidates will be. People are always bitching about the candidates, but
don't participate in choosing them. Be politically active, not just on
election day, but all year!

------
valarauca1
I don't vote as protest that our first past the post election system doesn't
accurately represent the will of the people as well as other voting schemes.

~~~
jeremysmyth
I'm honestly curious if you think this is a valid form of protest as opposed
to a form of apathy or laziness.

Personally I don't believe you can _change_ the system from _outside_ the
system without replacing the system (i.e. having a revolution), and currently
the number of people who are acting to replace the system from without is
sufficiently small (and with a sufficiently large number of ignorable fringe
elements) not to have any real effect.

Any protest that involves quietly sitting at home cannot have any real effect
unless a large enough population does it to make the rest of the people
realise that something is very wrong, rather than the usual hefty percentage
of apathetic or otherwise uninvolved people.

On the other hand you've got people like Lawrence Lessig and the Mayday PAC
([https://mayday.us/](https://mayday.us/)) who are actively trying to change
the system from _within_ , by electing candidates who support wide-ranging
form. This is a way to change the system, but it requires engaging with the
system on its (current) terms, not sitting it out because of, y'know, reasons.

~~~
Someone1234
You're suggesting a super PAC to solve the problems with US politics? There's
something unsettling and ironical about that.

~~~
jeremysmyth
You get the irony then. If Mayday succeeds, it'll render itself obsolete if
not illegal. This is entirely deliberate on the part of the people involved.

However, and more to the point, Mayday is an example of trying to change the
system from _within_ rather than from _without_. The system is currently too
powerful to try changing without engaging with it on its own terms, so it can
only be changed from within.

------
foobard
I recently phone banked for my party for the first time and found that the
voter rolls the party was working from had age, gender, race, and how many out
of the previous 3 elections the voter had actually shown up to the polls.

It is no wonder that politicians ignore issues affecting of young people: they
know for a fact that they don't vote in large numbers.

I voted today. I have always voted since I was of age. I get discouraged
living in Florida and having my vote drowned in a sea of geriatrics. But I
recognize that participating is the only way to affect change.

------
forgotpasswd3x
Yes, I will be voting. I live in south-east Michigan.

I will be voting because although my vote is statistically insignificant for
the larger elections, it carries more weight for local elections.

To the people that say "Don't vote, it's a broken system", I say why not go an
write in NOBODY. Do _something_ , because nobody sees _not voting_ as any kind
of protest. It's lazy, and you'll never change anything at all by staying
home.

~~~
valarauca1
Writing in for a non-registered write in candidate in Michigan (I live in
Michigan, you need to petition to be a write in candidate) results in your
vote being thrown out.

So there is no difference between not voting, and writing in "NOBODY". The
only difference is the civic duty circlejerk.

~~~
RossM
In UK elections they do announce the number of spoiled ballots, which might
give indication of the number of "neither" votes.

------
Piskvorrr
Nope. Not a citizen, or even located geographically close ;)

~~~
jsherer
Do you have the opportunity to vote in your location? If yes, do you?

~~~
TeMPOraL
My country has an up-coming election of self-governance officials (city
mayors, etc.). I don't see myself voting as not only there is absolutely no
one worth voting for, but this year candidates try to one-up one another in
the contest for most stupid election poster.

Just take a look at some:
[http://joemonster.org/link/pokaz/58169/Kwiatki_kampanii_samo...](http://joemonster.org/link/pokaz/58169/Kwiatki_kampanii_samorzadowej_2014)

------
dperny
Tuscaloosa, AL. I live in Alabama full time because I go to school here and
work here during the summers, and have for two years. Technically, though, I'm
a resident of Louisiana.

I registered to vote in Tuscaloosa in the last presidential election, because
I was told I could. Since then, Alabama has passed voter ID laws, and because
I don't possess an Alabama photo ID (my driver's license is from Louisiana), I
can't vote in Alabama.

I can't vote in Louisiana because I'm not registered there, and even if I was,
I don't know anything about the candidates or have any stake in the election
there.

~~~
dperny
Wait, I just looked it up. I can vote with a University ID card.

I'm gonna go vote now.

------
carsongross
I don't agree with Doug Casey on a lot of stuff, but his five reasons not to
vote are pretty funny and an excellent foil to the constant & unexamined
appeals that we vote:

[http://www.caseyresearch.com/articles/doug-caseys-top-
five-r...](http://www.caseyresearch.com/articles/doug-caseys-top-five-reasons-
not-vote)

------
peapicker
I always vote. Thank you to the 60+% of you who don't vote, giving my vote
more weight.

------
quaffapint
I voted (and will continue to vote) in every election since I was old enough -
didn't matter how big or small. I always look at it as you don't vote you
don't have the right to bitch about things :).

~~~
pzxc
That's a common aphorism, but it's not logical. Declining to vote doesn't
negate your right to bitch about the political system or even individual
politicians, any more than voting and _your guy winning_ negates your right to
bitch about that individual (which is slightly more logical, but still doesn't
pass muster)

~~~
forgotpasswd3x
By not voting your showing that you won't even make the slightest effort to
get the government you want. I mean, voting isn't hard. It takes maybe 20
minutes. If all the people that don't vote because they don't think it would
matter, actually fucking voted, we'd have a significantly different
government.

~~~
crazypyro
Do you honestly think that we just need more people voting to change the
system? The average voter isn't going to understand the underlying failures of
a 2 party democracy in which no third party has a chance at significantly
upsetting the status quo. Are you going to vote to continue the foreign wars
or vote to continue the foreign wars while saying you won't? That's your
choice. Also people aren't going to become informed to vote. More people
voting would probably just mean a similar split to the current one.

~~~
forgotpasswd3x
Yes, I honestly think that the system would be more representative of the
country if more of the country voted. Young people's views, and those of
boomers and the elderly differ greatly on many issues, but they don't vote.

I'm not saying it would magically fix everything but it's certainly a start.
But by all means, continue to not vote, and complain about the system, because
that's _sure to help_.

------
john_b
No, for several reasons.

The congressional election in my district is essentially a foregone conclusion
and since our voting system is winner-take-all there is really no point in
voting for the opposition. I also happen to think both candidates are
unqualified to represent themselves, much less a state.

My state has judicial elections as well, which might be worth voting in if any
of the candidates were less despicable. Some of their ads are Onion-worthy.
All judicial candidates I've seen have breathlessly tried to one-up their
opponents by being "tougher on crime" while glossing over thier utter
disregard for the either the federal or state Constitutions. It's made me
wonder if defense attorneys can even pursue a judicial career in a place like
this.

Some have made the argument that not voting is also equivalent to a vote of no
confidence in the available candidates and/or system as a whole. I kind of
agree with this, but doubt that such a protest is really effective.

One of the few things our highly divided political factions do agree on is
that everyone should vote. Preferably for their party, but at least vote for
someone. Depending on your perspective, this is either evidence that voting is
such an obviously good thing which everyone should do regardless of their
circumstances, or (if you are less trusting of their stated motivations) an
attempt to ensure their own legitimacy. In a way, each vote that isn't cast is
a vote against all the candidates, so the idea that someone would not vote is
equally offensive to our political factions regardless of what side of the
aisle they sit on. Since I happen to think that many of these individuals do
not deserve their present positions, and the candidates their respective
caucases and donors have promoted to replace them are no better, not voting is
the most natural expression of my opinion "you are all unqualified."

Basically, the marginal value of spending my time not voting (e.g. working,
reading, even writing about why I don't see a point in voting in this
election) far exceeds the expected return on that same time should I spend it
voting. I suspect it's the same for many people. Most arguments to the
contrary appeal to various theoretical notions or idealistic purposes/side
effects of voting, which to me just sounds like "you should vote because it
will make you feel good." If it makes you feel good, then go ahead. Some
people like to feel like they're participating. I prefer to _know_ that I'm
impacting the decisions that get made in my state in a positive way, and I
don't consider selecting the lesser of two evils to meet that requirement.

------
malyk
Yep. Oakland, CA.

------
adultSwim
Yes

~~~
jsherer
Great!

