Get Off That Chair And Vote
If we all stopped enabling the Republicans—where we sit out the election because we know we won’t get what we want in one single election night—we could see a lot more wins, all over the country.
I’m here to urge everyone to vote.
I’m sure that being a Liberaland reader, you are already above average in looks and intelligence, so I’m sure I don’t have to convince you that voting is important. But maybe you have a friend or a relative who, dismayed by the politics that are grinding to a complete halt everything in our country, and who has decided to sit this election out; too pure, they want to sit above the fray. I want to give you some arguments to help convince this person to join you in voting on Tuesday.
- If your friend is unhappy with the two-party system, then they don’t have to vote for the two-party system.
Vote for a third-party candidate. Here in Seattle, we have a chance to vote for a socialist for the state assembly, imagine that! Your friend might say that voting for a third party candidate is throwing away his/her vote, but since you friend was not planning to vote anyway, it is just the opposite! If enough people voted for socialists, Green Party candidates, and unaffiliated progressives, the two-party system might improve, and a candidate who better represents your friend’s beliefs might be elected. Shorthand: sometimes the socialist wins! But the socialist will not win without voters.
- If your friend finds both candidates at the federal level to be, well, unacceptable, then encourage them to vote in the races that matter to him/her.
- If your friend tells you that there is no difference between the two major parties, well, your friend really needs some help.
Republicans are against all forms of reproductive choice. Republicans are against allowing minorities to vote (including racial minorities, sexual minorities, and religious minorities). The only thing that Republicans are in favor of is coddling the wealthy and empowering corporations. By not voting, your friend is serving their larger agenda.
The solution for all of us is not less engagement with the process, the solution is to become fully engaged. If you want better candidates, then you need to demand them. The way to demand better candidates is to participate.
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Tengrain
Fully caffeinated with twice the sugar, unabashedly liberal. Award-winning Americans United blogger, blogs at Mock Paper Scissors, and sometimes at Crooks and Liars.
You can follow @Tengrain on Twitter, or you might see him enjoying coffee somewhere in Seattle at any given moment of the day.
tiredoftea November 3rd, 2014 at 23:24
Sorry to throw some cold water on this, but if your friends need cajoling, they likely aren’t registered!
OldLefty November 4th, 2014 at 06:39
“if your friends need cajoling, they likely aren’t registered!
_______
I find that not to be true.
The majority of those who vote in presidential elections don’t vote in midterms.
The young people who have little kids and trying to get careers underway don’t vote in midterms, and the names out there mean very little to them because there is very little discussion about issues, they don’t see political ads (which is probably a good thing….that is why they DO come out in the presidential elections and set things right again, only to sit back and allow us to fall back again.
rg9rts November 4th, 2014 at 08:07
People don’t understand that the power is in the state houses and not DC….these are the most important elections not the federal ones
OldLefty November 4th, 2014 at 09:02
I half agree.
tiredoftea November 4th, 2014 at 00:24
Sorry to throw some cold water on this, but if your friends need cajoling, they likely aren’t registered!
OldLefty November 4th, 2014 at 07:39
“if your friends need cajoling, they likely aren’t registered!
_______
I find that not to be true.
The majority of those who vote in presidential elections don’t vote in midterms.
The young people who have little kids and trying to get careers underway don’t vote in midterms, and the names out there mean very little to them because there is very little discussion about issues, they don’t see political ads (which is probably a good thing….that is why they DO come out in the presidential elections and set things right again, only to sit back and allow us to fall back again.
rg9rts November 4th, 2014 at 09:07
People don’t understand that the power is in the state houses and not DC….these are the most important elections not the federal ones
OldLefty November 4th, 2014 at 10:02
I half agree.
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 3rd, 2014 at 23:45
Really stretching here….
ChrisVosburg November 4th, 2014 at 00:20
Whatsamatta Susie [laughing], got tired of being called PP?
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 4th, 2014 at 07:29
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, You missed that whole thread… It was really funny. I will have to find it for you so you can read. But Carla wound up giving me this nickname, so I am running with it… LOL
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 09:03
“HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, You missed that whole thread… It was really funny”
No…. it isn’t.
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 4th, 2014 at 09:14
to each their own opinion
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 09:47
I don’t have much of a sense of humor this morning…. I apologize
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 4th, 2014 at 10:08
Apology accepted
ChrisVosburg November 4th, 2014 at 11:26
Feel better now? You’ve gone and made wee Susie cry. :-)
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 11:55
lol lol
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 4th, 2014 at 08:42
OK, Found it. Go to the comments section and scroll down until you see me. Some poster named “Tracey Marie” keeps calling me Mike from Politico, and I am here as a poser using a different name.
I now refer to her as “Blue Waffle” … (Google it)
But in this thread, you will see where Carla decided she was going to call me “Susie” and I have just been running with it since… LOL
http://www.alan.com/2014/10/29/illinois-teacher-repeatedly-calls-students-ngger-and-slave-after-they-object-to-african-american/
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 09:01
I don’t think people care enough to do that…
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 4th, 2014 at 09:13
that comment was directed to a very specific individual who I have communicated extensively with on here.
Dont really care whether or not you care to do it.
ChrisVosburg November 4th, 2014 at 11:43
Whew and I only had to slog through like about a hundred comments to get to it.
Sorry, can’t call you Susie.
I knew a coupla sisters in high school who called themselves Mimi and Didi, and was chagrined to learn that they had abandoned the perfectly wonderful names Michelle and Adrienne, and never called them Mimi and Didi again.
Since then, I’ve made it a habit. Never called girlfriend Becky anything but Rebecca.
Sorry, Susan, just can’t do it.
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 4th, 2014 at 12:24
HAHAHAHAHAHA, Ok you can just call me “PP” then… =)
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 4th, 2014 at 00:45
Really stretching here….
ChrisVosburg November 4th, 2014 at 01:20
Whatsamatta Susie [laughing], got tired of being called PP?
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 4th, 2014 at 08:29
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, You missed that whole thread… It was really funny. I will have to find it for you so you can read. But Carla wound up giving me this nickname, so I am running with it… LOL
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 10:03
It seems like your trying too hard to convince people
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 4th, 2014 at 10:14
to each their own opinion
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 10:47
I don’t have much of a sense of humor this morning…. I apologize
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 4th, 2014 at 11:08
Apology accepted
ChrisVosburg November 4th, 2014 at 12:26
Feel better now? You’ve gone and made wee Susie cry. :-)
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 12:55
lol lol
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 4th, 2014 at 09:42
OK, Found it. Go to the comments section and scroll down until you see me. Some poster named “Tracey Marie” keeps calling me Mike from Politico, and I am here as a poser using a different name.
I now refer to her as “Blue Waffle” … (Google it)
But in this thread, you will see where Carla decided she was going to call me “Susie” and I have just been running with it since… LOL
http://www.alan.com/2014/10/29/illinois-teacher-repeatedly-calls-students-ngger-and-slave-after-they-object-to-african-american/
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 10:01
I don’t think people care enough to do that…
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 4th, 2014 at 10:13
that comment was directed to a very specific individual who I have communicated extensively with on here.
Dont really care whether or not you care to do it.
ChrisVosburg November 4th, 2014 at 12:43
Whew and I only had to slog through like about a hundred comments to get to it.
Sorry, can’t call you Susie.
I knew a coupla sisters in high school who called themselves Mimi and Didi, and was chagrined to learn that they had abandoned the perfectly wonderful names Michelle and Adrienne, and never called them Mimi and Didi again.
Since then, I’ve made it a habit. Never called girlfriend Becky anything but Rebecca.
Sorry, Susan, just can’t do it.
Pistol-Packing AKA "Susie" November 4th, 2014 at 13:24
HAHAHAHAHAHA, Ok you can just call me “PP” then… =)
ChrisVosburg November 4th, 2014 at 01:17
Not that it makes a difference in my case, since I mailed in my vote some time ago, but tengrain, what you’ve written here is a harangue, not persuasive speech, and as hammered home by the headline demand “Get Out Of That Chair And Vote,” is more likely to raise the response “fuck you, don’t tell me what to do!” than encourage a vote.
I’m further disheartened by your devotion of a large part of your post to tacit endorsement of third-party candidacies, without explaining the consequence. Thanks again Ralph.
I don’t agree that readers here need to be cajoled to “engage,” but if I did I’d simply rouse ’em with a reminder from the time of great madness, as expressed in a song I played tonight on the jukebox down the pub, whose chorus went like this:
America, where are you now/
Don’t you care about/
Your sons and daughters/
Don’t you know/
We need you now/
We can’t fight alone/
Against the monster/
–Monster (1969), Steppenwolf
.
mea_mark November 4th, 2014 at 09:35
Voting for a third party candidate is better than not voting at all.
ChrisVosburg November 4th, 2014 at 12:22
Better for who?
As I say, one must consider the cost of walking out of the voting booth basking in the warm glow of self-indulgence, with idealogical purity intact, after casting a vote for a niche candidate who has made unrealistic promises because that candidate knows full well he’ll never be called upon to deliver them.
And whichever imperfect candidate eventually wins, the niche candidate voter can primly dismiss responsibility for that candidate’s imperfect actions with “don’t look at me, I didn’t vote for him.”
And the niche candidate voter congratulates himself again; he staunchly remained above the fray, he bravely refused get his hands dirty.
Again, better for who? Self or Country?
mea_mark November 4th, 2014 at 12:32
I think at some point the republican party is just going to be the irrelevant party of wackos. When that happens the democratic party will be seen as the conservative party and there will room for a new party that is far more progressive. Voting now for third party candidates could help determine what political parties will dominate in the future.
Obewon November 4th, 2014 at 00:43
I have the goo-goo syndrome, I want everyone to vote unlike the floundering GOP without any POTUS path to 271 Electoral Votes:) Paul Weyrich, father of the right-wing movement and co-founder of the Heritage Foundation, Moral Majority and various other voter disenfranchisement skanky groups. http://crooksandliars.com/2007/06/07/paul-weyrich-goo-goo-syndrome
Obewon November 4th, 2014 at 01:43
Progressive liberals and all Dems have the goo-goo syndrome, We want all U.S. citizens to legally vote! Unlike the floundering 23% remaining GOP registered voter share, having no POTUS path to 271 Electoral Votes:) Paul Weyrich, father of the right-wing movement and co-founder of the Heritage Foundation, Moral Majority and various other voter disenfranchisement Koch bros groups hate Democracy. http://crooksandliars.com/2007/06/07/paul-weyrich-goo-goo-syndrome
fahvel November 4th, 2014 at 03:14
I wish you all the best for this election – keep the foul mouths out of office!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
fahvel November 4th, 2014 at 04:14
I wish you all the best for this election – keep the foul mouths out of office!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Robert M. Snyder November 4th, 2014 at 03:18
If you can’t name the three branches of government, please don’t vote. If you don’t know the difference between the deficit and the debt, please don’t vote. If you can’t find Iraq on a map, please don’t vote.
Roctuna November 4th, 2014 at 07:33
I’ll just say that I disagree strongly with your position. Citizens need to vote regardless of how they perceive their self-interest and the interests of the country. Without the act of voting most would have no connection to the greater good or “the commons”. How can the country ask sacrifice, if needed, if the voting public has no skin in the game? As for what you seem to think many don’t know, look towards decades of conservative budget cuts in education as a contributing cause.
Robert M. Snyder November 4th, 2014 at 08:43
Rights and responsibilities go hand-in-hand. If someone is going to exercise their right to vote, then they have a responsibility to at least know some basic facts about the world in which they live. I agree that young people are not learning Civics, but there are many contributing causes, most of which are cultural, IMO.
OldLefty November 4th, 2014 at 09:09
While I see your point, (to a degree), it is well known that those who perceive that they have much at stake, know the most and vote the most but this is often like one issue voters who only know the basics and care about that one thing and still may be grossly misinformed even on that issue.
On the other hand, some of the people who NEED to vote the most, are the very ones who feel that their votes don’t matter, and thus are not interested to learn.
Preventing them from voting just locks them into that cycle.
Robert M. Snyder November 4th, 2014 at 09:37
Both of my college-educated kids, and most of their friends, do not pay attention to national and world events, and do not vote. My kids did pay attention and voted in the 2008 general election, but have tuned out and not voted since.
A few weeks ago I had a conversation with a 27 year old physical therapist with a doctorate degree. She had strong feelings about the ACA, because she is dealing with its effects every day. But she admitted that she and most of her friends do not vote.
When I urged my son to vote in the 2012 election, he responded that he really doesn’t pay attention to events and didn’t feel qualified to vote.
The PT I mentioned has five stars and glowing reviews on HealthGrades. My son is very good at what he does and takes a leadership role within the company where he works. These are highly-motivated, career-oriented young people who for some reason are ignoring national and world events, despite having parents who do follow events and do vote regularly.
My wife and I started paying attention and voting in our early twenties. I am confident that my kids will eventually follow suit, but they’re already in their mid- to late-twenties. Poor Civics education is probably a factor, but I think there are also strong cultural factors at work.
When I served on my local school board, most of my fellow board members took a broad interest in school affairs and tried to become well-informed before casting votes. But a couple of members were motivated because of a single issue. These folks took no interest in becoming informed, but still cast votes on every issue that came up. Whenever any of us asked questions and engaged in discussion during board meetings, these single-issue members would sigh, groan, and make faces to express their displeasure with the rest of us. They were there for one reason only, and didn’t care about the broader interests of the school district as a whole. That is not what I would call responsible citizenship. I put single-issue voters in the same category.
I would love to see everyone coming out to vote at the polls, but only if they have a basic awareness of national and world events. I am very concerned about the cultural forces that are causing young people to pay even less attention to national and world events than my generation did. I wish I had the answer to that problem.
OldLefty November 4th, 2014 at 11:37
Again, I agree, but few who vote do.
I find many of the young who do not vote in midterms are very knowledgable in current events, but not in the Congressional politics.
For example, many know how ISIS came to be and blame the initial war in Iraq, but don’t translate that into Joe Blo v Joe Shmo running in the 12th district.
Many knew everything about the public option, but not that it was filibustered in the Senate.
Roctuna November 4th, 2014 at 19:02
I appreciate your experiences, am happy for your family and especially I thank you for sitting on a school board. That’s a thankless task. However, what I got from your post is that there are people with a lot “on the ball” that don’t vote so people with less on the ball shouldn’t. I still contend that everyone’s perception of the issues and solutions, however dim it may be, grants them the right to participate in the process. If they have enough on the ball to get to a polling place, they should not be denied.
Robert M. Snyder November 4th, 2014 at 20:18
I agree that everyone has the right, and I would not deny that right, no matter how dim their perception. I am very proud of my kids in so many ways, but I cannot say that I am proud of their relative lack of interest in national and global events. I suspect that will change as they begin to put down roots.
Again, I think there are cultural factors at work. During the Vietnam era, people got drafted, so international events were on every young person’s mind. Today, with the all-volunteer military, that has changed. Also, I think information overload may be a factor. With so much news and opinion from so many sources, I think it must seem overwhelming to a lot of people, so they just tune it out.
It really bothers me when people who engage in political discussion are rude and insulting to one another. I think it really turns off the people who are just sticking their toe in the water.
Do you remember the debates that Fred Friendly (his real name) of Columbia Univ. used to host on PBS? Those were a great example of how to put the “civil” back into civil discourse. I’d love to see more of that and less of the “us vs. them” approach we’ve seen in recent decades.
Political discourse doesn’t have to be ugly. I have known many liberals for whom I have great respect and with whom I share many views. We may disagree about the appropriate role of government, but we love our kids, parents, and spouses, we try to please our employers or customers, we pay our taxes, we try to help our neighbors.
This left-vs-right hatred has just gotten out of control. I don’t hate anyone. I try to understand other people’s point of view, and hope they will try to understand mine. That’s what the Fred Friendly debates were like. If only we could get back to that type of dialogue, maybe more young people would get engaged.
Roctuna November 4th, 2014 at 20:40
Shallow, sensationalist media will inform us of our demise in 10 second sound bites consisting of monosyllables. They love the hatred and do their best to promote it. Take for example Pistol Packin’ Susie posting on another story who thinks all libs want to see her dead. The days of Fred Friendly are long gone. He was big at CBS when they had integrity.
Robert M. Snyder November 4th, 2014 at 23:41
My US congressman (R) just won 67% of the vote. I am going to send him a hand-written letter congratulating him and urging him to work with the president to find areas where we can compromise.
One of the key principles of diplomacy is that each side has to give the other something they want so that they can both claim a victory.
Polls indicate that about 75% of Americans support the Keystone Pipeline, so the Republicans will probably make it one of their first objectives. If they are smart, they will realize that those who oppose it have valid concerns, and they will craft a bill that addresses those concerns in meaningful ways.
For example, they could include language that prescribes severe penalties for the pipeline operator in the event of a significant spill. That would provide a strong incentive for the operator to build and manage the pipeline responsibly.
Any Republican who would oppose such a provision is an embarrassment to the party.
Roctuna November 5th, 2014 at 11:10
Robert, how can you look at Cruz, Gohmert, Paul and so many others and say “if they are smart”? These next two years are going to be a disaster. There are too few who could even hope to be diplomats or statesmen any more.
Robert M. Snyder November 5th, 2014 at 11:34
Cruz is a big liability. He is clearly not a statesman, and not even a team player.
I worked for many years as a database developer. When I met with people in the Sales, Marketing, Customer Service, and Accounting departments, they often presented me with proposed solutions that sub-optimized company processes to benefit their own departments, but at the expense of other departments. My job was to get them to tell me about their needs and concerns, and then to craft solutions that addressed everyone’s concerns in an equitable manner.
So if I were McConnell, my approach would be to ask everyone (both parties) to take a step back and look at what CONCERNS people have instead of constantly arguing about PROPOSED SOLUTIONS. The art of statesmanship is not to pick winners and losers, but to find innovative solutions that address everyone’s concerns to some degree. It takes diplomacy, but it also takes imagination and creativity.
mea_mark November 5th, 2014 at 11:50
I don’t think you understand that the republicans want to shrink and dismantle parts of the government that keep industry in check. They don’t want to make things better, they want industry to operate more freely without regard for who may get hurt or how the environment will be effected adversely. The republicans don’t want solutions to problems, they want profits without regard for the problems they create.
Robert M. Snyder November 5th, 2014 at 12:13
Not this Republican. I don’t want to “take back” the government. I want the government to work on everyone’s behalf. I think a lot of ordinary Republicans (and Democrats) feel the same way.
Compromise means nobody gets their way entirely, and everybody has to make accommodations for the good of society as a whole.
Democrats and Republicans each have valid concerns. If the Republicans in Congress ignore Democratic concerns, then any laws they manage to pass will be controversial and only supported by half the population. Good laws provide solutions that address everyone’s concerns to some degree. If Republicans are going to craft a bill to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, then they need to acknowledge the genuine concerns that many Democrats (and Republicans!) have about the environment, and build in some provisions that motivate the operator to prevent accidents and provide appropriate oversight.
I am anticipating your response to be something along the lines of “They won’t do that because they are bought and paid for by big business.”. You may be right. But I hope you’re not. I hope they realize that serving the public interest is at least as important (for getting re-elected) as garnering campaign funding.
mea_mark November 5th, 2014 at 14:48
I guess I should have said ‘republican leaders’, not just republicans. You got my response right. I hope I am wrong also, I don’t think I am though since McConnell has been saying this is pretty much what he wants to do. The republican leaders seem to think they have a mandate to do what they want and serve the few, not the public in general.
Robert M. Snyder November 5th, 2014 at 15:23
I listened to Rush for 3 minutes today and switched it off in disgust. He was arguing against the whole notion of compromise.
You can’t govern if you only care about the concerns of half the population. He doesn’t seem to get it. I guess that makes me a RINO. So be it.
I think our economy suffers as a result of this “winner take all” strategy. If a business is thinking about a large capital investment, like building a new plant, they need to have a sense that the legal and economic landscape is somewhat stable. If each party thinks that a slim majority gives them the right to drastically change the rules, then businesses are going to be much more cautious.
arc99 November 5th, 2014 at 15:30
please do what you can to convince your conservative colleagues. the theme coming from conservative media this morning is just the opposite of the point you make.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/392082/governing-trap-editors
If voters come to believe that a Republican Congress and a Democratic president are doing a fine job of governing together, why wouldn’t they vote to continue the arrangement in 2016?
Which brings us to the alternative course: building the case for Republican governance after 2016. That means being a responsible party, to be sure, just as the conventional wisdom has it. But part of that responsibility involves explaining what Republicans stand for — what, that is, they would do if they had the White House. And outlining a governing agenda for the future is a different matter from trying to govern in 2015. (For one thing, it is not doomed to failure.)
mea_mark November 5th, 2014 at 15:48
The republicans should quit pushing the fear of change narrative on businesses. Change happens and businesses adapt, they always have. Neither party proposes drastic changes unless absolutely necessary like in times of war. The republicans however all always pushing the fear of great change and the need to stop it, whether there is any great change or not. The slightest change seems to generate great fear now-a-days for the republicans.
OldLefty November 5th, 2014 at 15:49
To us, bipartisanship is them being forced to agree with us after we politically have cleaned their clocks and beaten them.
– Rush Limbaugh 2009
1960; American Conservative icon and actor John Wayne, on the election of JFK, in 1960: lack all conviction
“I didn’t vote for him, but he’s my president and I hope he does a good job.”
2009; American Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, on the inauguration of Barack Obama in 2009 ;
“I hope he fails”.
Robert M. Snyder November 4th, 2014 at 04:18
If you can’t name the three branches of government, please don’t vote. If you don’t know the difference between the deficit and the debt, please don’t vote. If you can’t find Iraq on a map, please don’t vote.
Roctuna November 4th, 2014 at 08:33
I’ll just say that I disagree strongly with your position. Citizens need to vote regardless of how they perceive their self-interest and the interests of the country. Without the act of voting most would have no connection to the greater good or “the commons”. How can the country ask sacrifice, if needed, if the voting public has no skin in the game? As for what you seem to think many don’t know, look towards decades of conservative budget cuts in education as a contributing cause.
Robert M. Snyder November 4th, 2014 at 09:43
Rights and responsibilities go hand-in-hand. If someone is going to exercise their right to vote, then they have a responsibility to at least know some basic facts about the world in which they live. I agree that young people are not learning Civics, but there are many contributing causes, most of which are cultural, IMO.
OldLefty November 4th, 2014 at 10:09
While I see your point, (to a degree), it is well known that those who perceive that they have much at stake, know the most and vote the most but this is often like one issue voters who only know the basics and care about that one thing and still may be grossly misinformed even on that issue.
On the other hand, some of the people who NEED to vote the most, are the very ones who feel that their votes don’t matter, and thus are not interested to learn.
Preventing them from voting just locks them into that cycle.
Robert M. Snyder November 4th, 2014 at 10:37
Both of my college-educated kids, and most of their friends, do not pay attention to national and world events, and do not vote. My kids did pay attention and voted in the 2008 general election, but have tuned out and not voted since.
A few weeks ago I had a conversation with a 27 year old physical therapist with a doctorate degree. She had strong feelings about the ACA, because she is dealing with its effects every day. But she admitted that she and most of her friends do not vote.
When I urged my son to vote in the 2012 election, he responded that he really doesn’t pay attention to events and didn’t feel qualified to vote.
The PT I mentioned has five stars and glowing reviews on HealthGrades. My son is very good at what he does and takes a leadership role within the company where he works. These are highly-motivated, career-oriented young people who for some reason are ignoring national and world events, despite having parents who do follow events and do vote regularly.
My wife and I started paying attention and voting in our early twenties. I am confident that my kids will eventually follow suit, but they’re already in their mid- to late-twenties. Poor Civics education is probably a factor, but I think there are also strong cultural factors at work.
When I served on my local school board, most of my fellow board members took a broad interest in school affairs and tried to become well-informed before casting votes. But a couple of members were motivated because of a single issue. These folks took no interest in becoming informed, but still cast votes on every issue that came up. Whenever any of us asked questions and engaged in discussion during board meetings, these single-issue members would sigh, groan, and make faces to express their displeasure with the rest of us. They were there for one reason only, and didn’t care about the broader interests of the school district as a whole. That is not what I would call responsible citizenship. I put single-issue voters in the same category.
I would love to see everyone coming out to vote at the polls, but only if they have a basic awareness of national and world events. I am very concerned about the cultural forces that are causing young people to pay even less attention to national and world events than my generation did. I wish I had the answer to that problem.
OldLefty November 4th, 2014 at 12:37
Again, I agree, but few who vote do.
I find many of the young who do not vote in midterms are very knowledgable in current events, but not in the Congressional politics.
For example, many know how ISIS came to be and blame the initial war in Iraq, but don’t translate that into Joe Blo v Joe Shmo running in the 12th district.
Many knew everything about the public option, but not that it was filibustered in the Senate.
Roctuna November 4th, 2014 at 20:02
I appreciate your experiences, am happy for your family and especially I thank you for sitting on a school board. That’s a thankless task. However, what I got from your post is that there are people with a lot “on the ball” that don’t vote so people with less on the ball shouldn’t. I still contend that everyone’s perception of the issues and solutions, however dim it may be, grants them the right to participate in the process. If they have enough on the ball to get to a polling place, they should not be denied.
Robert M. Snyder November 4th, 2014 at 21:18
I agree that everyone has the right, and I would not deny that right, no matter how dim their perception. I am very proud of my kids in so many ways, but I cannot say that I am proud of their relative lack of interest in national and global events. I suspect that will change as they begin to put down roots.
Again, I think there are cultural factors at work. During the Vietnam era, people got drafted, so international events were on every young person’s mind. Today, with the all-volunteer military, that has changed. Also, I think information overload may be a factor. With so much news and opinion from so many sources, I think it must seem overwhelming to a lot of people, so they just tune it out.
It really bothers me when people who engage in political discussion are rude and insulting to one another. I think it really turns off the people who are just sticking their toe in the water.
Do you remember the debates that Fred Friendly (his real name) of Columbia Univ. used to host on PBS? Those were a great example of how to put the “civil” back into civil discourse. I’d love to see more of that and less of the “us vs. them” approach we’ve seen in recent decades.
Political discourse doesn’t have to be ugly. I have known many liberals for whom I have great respect and with whom I share many views. We may disagree about the appropriate role of government, but we love our kids, parents, and spouses, we try to please our employers or customers, we pay our taxes, we try to help our neighbors.
This left-vs-right hatred has just gotten out of control. I don’t hate anyone. I try to understand other people’s point of view, and hope they will try to understand mine. That’s what the Fred Friendly debates were like. If only we could get back to that type of dialogue, maybe more young people would get engaged.
Roctuna November 4th, 2014 at 21:40
Shallow, sensationalist media will inform us of our demise in 10 second sound bites consisting of monosyllables. They love the hatred and do their best to promote it. Take for example Pistol Packin’ Susie posting on another story who thinks all libs want to see her dead. The days of Fred Friendly are long gone. He was big at CBS when they had integrity.
Robert M. Snyder November 5th, 2014 at 00:41
My US congressman (R) just won 67% of the vote. I am going to send him a hand-written letter congratulating him and urging him to work with the president to find areas where we can compromise.
One of the key principles of diplomacy is that each side has to give the other something they want so that they can both claim a victory.
Polls indicate that about 75% of Americans support the Keystone Pipeline, so the Republicans will probably make it one of their first objectives. If they are smart, they will realize that those who oppose it have valid concerns, and they will craft a bill that addresses those concerns in meaningful ways.
For example, they could include language that prescribes severe penalties for the pipeline operator in the event of a significant spill. That would provide a strong incentive for the operator to build and manage the pipeline responsibly.
Any Republican who would oppose such a provision is an embarrassment to the party.
Roctuna November 5th, 2014 at 12:10
Robert, how can you look at Cruz, Gohmert, Paul and so many others and say “if they are smart”? These next two years are going to be a disaster. There are too few who could even hope to be diplomats or statesmen any more.
Robert M. Snyder November 5th, 2014 at 12:34
Cruz is a big liability. He is clearly not a statesman, and not even a team player.
I worked for many years as a database developer. When I met with people in the Sales, Marketing, Customer Service, and Accounting departments, they often presented me with proposed solutions that sub-optimized company processes to benefit their own departments, but at the expense of other departments. My job was to get them to tell me about their needs and concerns, and then to craft solutions that addressed everyone’s concerns in an equitable manner.
So if I were McConnell, my approach would be to ask everyone (both parties) to take a step back and look at what CONCERNS people have instead of constantly arguing about PROPOSED SOLUTIONS. The art of statesmanship is not to pick winners and losers, but to find innovative solutions that address everyone’s concerns to some degree. It takes diplomacy, but it also takes imagination and creativity.
mea_mark November 5th, 2014 at 12:50
I don’t think you understand that the republicans want to shrink and dismantle parts of the government that keep industry in check. They don’t want to make things better, they want industry to operate more freely without regard for who may get hurt or how the environment will be effected adversely. The republicans don’t want solutions to problems, they want profits without regard for the problems they create.
Robert M. Snyder November 5th, 2014 at 13:13
Not this Republican. I don’t want to “take back” the government. I want the government to work on everyone’s behalf. I think a lot of ordinary Republicans (and Democrats) feel the same way.
Compromise means nobody gets their way entirely, and everybody has to make accommodations for the good of society as a whole.
Democrats and Republicans each have valid concerns. If the Republicans in Congress ignore Democratic concerns, then any laws they manage to pass will be controversial and only supported by half the population. Good laws provide solutions that address everyone’s concerns to some degree. If Republicans are going to craft a bill to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, then they need to acknowledge the genuine concerns that many Democrats (and Republicans!) have about the environment, and build in some provisions that motivate the operator to prevent accidents and provide appropriate oversight.
I am anticipating your response to be something along the lines of “They won’t do that because they are bought and paid for by big business.”. You may be right. But I hope you’re not. I hope they realize that serving the public interest is at least as important (for getting re-elected) as garnering campaign funding.
mea_mark November 5th, 2014 at 15:48
I guess I should have said ‘republican leaders’, not just republicans. You got my response right. I hope I am wrong also, I don’t think I am though since McConnell has been saying this is pretty much what he wants to do. The republican leaders seem to think they have a mandate to do what they want and serve the few, not the public in general.
Robert M. Snyder November 5th, 2014 at 16:23
I listened to Rush for 3 minutes today and switched it off in disgust. He was arguing against the whole notion of compromise.
You can’t govern if you only care about the concerns of half the population. He doesn’t seem to get it. I guess that makes me a RINO. So be it.
I think our economy suffers as a result of this “winner take all” strategy. If a business is thinking about a large capital investment, like building a new plant, they need to have a sense that the legal and economic landscape is somewhat stable. If each party thinks that a slim majority gives them the right to drastically change the rules, then businesses are going to be much more cautious.
arc99 November 5th, 2014 at 16:30
please do what you can to convince your conservative colleagues. the theme coming from conservative media this morning is just the opposite of the point you make.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/392082/governing-trap-editors
If voters come to believe that a Republican Congress and a Democratic president are doing a fine job of governing together, why wouldn’t they vote to continue the arrangement in 2016?
Which brings us to the alternative course: building the case for Republican governance after 2016. That means being a responsible party, to be sure, just as the conventional wisdom has it. But part of that responsibility involves explaining what Republicans stand for — what, that is, they would do if they had the White House. And outlining a governing agenda for the future is a different matter from trying to govern in 2015. (For one thing, it is not doomed to failure.)
mea_mark November 5th, 2014 at 16:48
The republicans should quit pushing the fear of change narrative on businesses. Change happens and businesses adapt, they always have. Neither party proposes drastic changes unless absolutely necessary like in times of war. The republicans however all always pushing the fear of great change and the need to stop it, whether there is any great change or not. The slightest change seems to generate great fear now-a-days for the republicans.
OldLefty November 5th, 2014 at 16:49
To us, bipartisanship is them being forced to agree with us after we politically have cleaned their clocks and beaten them.
– Rush Limbaugh 2009
1960; American Conservative icon and actor John Wayne, on the election of JFK, in 1960: lack all conviction
“I didn’t vote for him, but he’s my president and I hope he does a good job.”
2009; American Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, on the inauguration of Barack Obama in 2009 ;
“I hope he fails”.
Budda November 4th, 2014 at 07:14
Some how I feel there will be a bigger than expected turn out this midterm ( I hope).
rg9rts November 4th, 2014 at 08:06
Voter ID should slow them down so that only the right folks vote
Budda November 4th, 2014 at 08:14
Some how I feel there will be a bigger than expected turn out this midterm ( I hope).
rg9rts November 4th, 2014 at 09:06
Voter ID should slow them down so that only the right folks vote
Anomaly 100 November 4th, 2014 at 07:37
Get up offa that thing and vote.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pq1w0syylZI
Anomaly 100 November 4th, 2014 at 08:37
Get up offa that thing and vote.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pq1w0syylZI
rg9rts November 4th, 2014 at 08:05
Been there done that two hours ago…
rg9rts November 4th, 2014 at 09:05
Been there done that two hours ago…
mea_mark November 4th, 2014 at 08:35
Voting for a third party candidate is better than not voting at all.
ChrisVosburg November 4th, 2014 at 11:22
Better for who?
As I say, one must consider the cost of walking out of the voting booth basking in the warm glow of self-indulgence, with idealogical purity intact, after casting a vote for a niche candidate who has made unrealistic promises because that candidate knows full well he’ll never be called upon to deliver them.
And whichever imperfect candidate eventually wins, the niche candidate voter can primly dismiss responsibility for that candidate’s imperfect actions with “don’t look at me, I didn’t vote for him.”
And the niche candidate voter congratulates himself again; he staunchly remained above the frey, he bravely refused get his hands dirty.
Again, better for who? Self or Country?
mea_mark November 4th, 2014 at 11:32
I think at some point the republican party is just going to be the irrelevant party of wackos. When that happens the democratic party will be seen as the conservative party and there will room for a new party that is far more progressive. Voting now for third party candidates could help determine what political parties will dominate in the future.
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 08:50
We get to vote by mail here in Oregon…. “It should be that simple” all across the country. I say let the whole Country do this THEN see how the Elections go… no long lines , no time off work, etc.
I have to tell you that the “polls” you see are a VERY bad thing!… I don’t trust them, I have a VERY hard time believing the country is so “evenly divided” in some cases a perfect split, or close to it… How is that possible? I’m so sick of hearing how the Republicans are going to take back the Senate… I hear this everyday now. Wouldn’t you think “some” people hearing this would say “Why bother?” MSNBC is doing their part along with Faux News to keep driving it home that so many people don’t vote during the mid-term… if you say it often enough, there will be people who won’t bother trying because the “polls” show your candidate is “too far behind” “not enough Dems will show up etc.
I voted… but I didn’t have to stand out in the rain/cold/long lines/take time off of work etc. I simply did some research on the candidates, picked the ones that I thought would do some good and mailed it off… IT SHOULD BE THAT SIMPLE!!
My hat is off to all of the people who DO take time from work/stand in long lines, often in bad weather etc.
Pilotshark November 4th, 2014 at 09:46
Yes, voted last week, also here in Oregon
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 09:52
YES! Isn’t it great to be able to do that?…. Glad to hear you voted ;)
I have to ask…. WHO did you vote for?….. (kidding of course)
Pilotshark November 4th, 2014 at 09:55
why all the correct ones of course ;-)
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 11:51
Of course…. ;)
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 09:50
We get to vote by mail here in Oregon…. “It should be that simple” all across the country. I say let the whole Country do this THEN see how the Elections go… no long lines , no time off work, etc.
I have to tell you that the “polls” you see are a VERY bad thing!… I don’t trust them, I have a VERY hard time believing the country is so “evenly divided” in some cases a perfect split, or close to it… How is that possible? I’m so sick of hearing how the Republicans are going to take back the Senate… I hear this everyday now. Wouldn’t you think “some” people hearing this would say “Why bother?” MSNBC is doing their part along with Faux News to keep driving it home that so many people don’t vote during the mid-term… if you say it often enough, there will be people who won’t bother trying because the “polls” show your candidate is “too far behind” “not enough Dems will show up etc.
I voted… but I didn’t have to stand out in the rain/cold/long lines/take time off of work etc. I simply did some research on the candidates, picked the ones that I thought would do some good and mailed it off… IT SHOULD BE THAT SIMPLE!!
My hat is off to all of the people who DO take time from work/stand in long lines, often
in bad weather etc.
EDIT: PLEASE take the time and vote… it is so very important. especially now.
I hope the polls are proven wrong by millions of people showing up that don’t normally vote during the mid-term… Voting CAN work!! Pass it on
Pilotshark November 4th, 2014 at 10:46
Yes, voted last week, also here in Oregon
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 10:52
YES! Isn’t it great to be able to do that?…. Glad to hear you voted ;)
I have to ask…. WHO did you vote for?….. (kidding of course)
Pilotshark November 4th, 2014 at 10:55
why all the correct ones of course ;-)
raincheck November 4th, 2014 at 12:51
Of course…. ;)