If there is one thing that has left a very bad taste in my mouth about the election this year, it's the low voter turnout. As of this post, we are over 10 million short of the last election. I realize that 2008 was an historic election but I feel an enormous amount of dismay at the fact that out of the 210 million or so people that are eligible to vote, only 120 million voted (130 in the last election).
Folks, this sucks. What needs to be done to get those extra 90 million people in the voting booth?
5 comments:
Most people don't really care who's president, and don't even know who represents them in Congress. Many don't have an opinion, don't think it matters, or don't think they're qualified to make such decisions. Many think all politicians are the same, or think they're all corrupt. Many don't want to vote because they don't want to feel responsible for the mess the country's in.
Basically, people don't vote unless there's something they want to vote for. This last election gave many people something to vote for, or against. In Minnesota it was the marriage inequality and voter suppression amendments.
My precinct had 97% turnout (percentage of registered voters who voted), while another precinct in our city had 104% turnout. That's possible because of same-day voter registration, and something that Republicans wanted to put a stop to with their voter suppression amendment. But renters--the people who stood to be disenfranchised by the amendment--turned out in large numbers because they knew their rights were on the line.
Typically Republicans intentionally trump up issues like gay marriage in 2004, and the health care law in 2010, to increase turnout in their base. But this can be a two-edged sword, one that backfired in Minnesota this time around: it's likely that the two ballot questions turned out more young people and Democrats to vote against it than Catholics and conservatives to vote for it.
Basically, people don't vote unless there's something they want to vote for.
Excellent observation, as is the note that most people don't care. You can argue that they should - but they will never be the fellow fanbois that M dreams they should be.
Nice to hear from you blk.
What needs to be done?
How about an actual choice?
How about a government that isn't bankrupting my children?
How about a congress that does NOT get re-elected no matter what they do (or don't do)?
How about a conservative candidate that really doesn't give a flying fuck about gay marriage?
How about a national candidate that might actually BELIEVE some of the pandering soundbites that come out of his mouth?
Why should I bother voting and give some sense of legitimacy to either of the two candidates that the (R) or (D) machine has decided are my only two choices?
If there is one thing that has left a very bad taste in my mouth about the election this year
Other than Obama's cock?
it's the low voter turnout
Oh. I see. That tasted goood. Well, to each his own.
Folks, this sucks
...even harder than I do on Obama's cock.
What needs to be done to get those extra 90 million people in the voting booth?
More free stuff?
"But renters--the people who stood to be disenfranchised by the amendment--turned out in large numbers because they knew their rights were on the line."
There is blk's half reasonable half stupid remarks again.
1) Requiring only citizens to vote is the law - not a suggestion. Democrats seem to miss that.
2) It has been shown that everyone can get a legal ID and probably needs one for all of the entitlements if they are poor.
3) Anyone who cannot or won't get an ID shouldn't be voting. If they can't or won't show that they are a citizen, F@#$ off! We want citizens who have a stake in this country voting, not foreigners or lunatics.
And how to renters get disenfranchised? I have rented for years and always got my voter registration correct. You talking about the 5 people that don't? And what rights are on the line?
Post a Comment