General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhere the Buck Really Stops
So some obviously able-bodied guy cross-parks his Escalade over two handicapped spots in front of a hospital entrance. He gets out, and tosses an empty coffee cup into the window of the car next to him. Then he spits on a seeing eye dog, trips an old lady, and cuts in at the head of the line. "I need to get someone to look at this finger," he says. "I'm teeing off in twenty minutes, so make it snappy."
That guy is still a better person than a non-voter.
When we get to the point where we look down on non-voters rather than sympathizing with them, when we no longer tolerate their learned helplessness, depression, and "political consumerist" whims, when their excuses fall on deaf ears, we will be on the right track.
unblock
(51,974 posts)there are better ways to encourage people to vote.
i also hope you're not looking down on people who aren't eligible to vote, e.g., children, who are also "non-voters".
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)Boom Sound 416
(4,185 posts)unblock
(51,974 posts)Boom Sound 416
(4,185 posts)Where did you get minors' inclusion in the OP?
French nationals can't vote either. Neither can dead people. It's pretty clear who the OP is targeting: eligibles.
Though I'm with you on the cynicism. (It gets the better of me too. Which is probably why I liked the imagery).
gulliver
(13,142 posts)You mistake me. I'm not trying to encourage non-voters to vote. I'm encouraging the attitude that non-voters should be despised. Ugly? Well, the result of non-voting is ugly.
I'll grant that a lot of people have found a way to kid themselves into believing that non-voting has some (any) moral foundation. That reasoning is itself is deeply ugly, the product of seeing the world through a straw. Occasionally, I feel the need to call the swamp a swamp and maybe try to drain it a little. And so I get some swamp on me.
gulliver
(13,142 posts)Sorry, I took your post seriously. Undo.
polichick
(37,152 posts)so often that they don't want to vote - or even to support a system that keeps such assholes in power.
Try writing a colorful tale about the real enemy.
(Hint: corruption)
gulliver
(13,142 posts)Good is a direction, not a place. If you vote, you vote for less corrupt, and less corruption is the result. Not voting is deeply corrupt.
polichick
(37,152 posts)gulliver
(13,142 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)gulliver
(13,142 posts)And hateful is a little strong. I tend to despise non-voters, not considering them fully worthy of hatred. It's the way everyone should feel about them.
polichick
(37,152 posts)You probably do a good goose step.
gulliver
(13,142 posts)jsr
(7,712 posts)Meanwhile people can vote, or not vote, for whatever reason they want.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)For some, not voting for a corrupt system is a political act.
polichick
(37,152 posts)So true - and I respect them for it.
May even join them one day if Dems keep running corporate servants.
gulliver
(13,142 posts)...and morally low as non-voters.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Are saying that they are ethically corrupt and morally low for not voting for people they hold in contempt?
"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." John Quincy Adams
gulliver
(13,142 posts)They don't have the standing.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Someone who always votes for someone, no matter how contemptible he/she is?
gulliver
(13,142 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)I always vote so, under your rubric, I'm allowed to hold politicians in contempt and refuse to vote for them. Or, at least, some of them. Or, write in a candidate I find not, or less, contemptible.
And, if none of the above was on the ballot, it would be voting. And, just like "not-voting", it would be making a political statement of "NO".
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)gulliver
(13,142 posts)An unrec from anyone who has the slightest respect for non-voters is really a rec.