Is voting wortwhile if you live in a solid state?

[phk]

Is voting wortwhile if you live in a solid state?

[A18]

I guess you mean presidential elections. Would voting not be worthwhile if we had a national popular vote, and it was 1984?

[Alcon]

Yes!  There are few places where there are no competitive elections whatsoever.

[dazzleman]

I always vote regardless.  Besides, there are elections other than presidential elections.

And even in a presidential election, there is psychological impact to the popular vote, even if a person, such as myself, is voting against the sure winner of my state.

Sad to say, the last time I voted for the winner in the state I was living in at the time was 1984, when I lived in New York and voted for Ronald Reagan.  In 1988, I voted for George Bush, and while he carried Connecticut, where I live now, I lived in New York at the time.

Since then, the state I have lived in has always been carried by the Democratic presidential candidate, none of whom I have voted for.

But I still do pretty well at voting for the national winner.

[phk]

There are few places where there are no competitive elections whatsoever.

Clovis, CA; Santa Cruz, CA

[Alcon]

There are few places where there are no competitive elections whatsoever.

Clovis, CA; Santa Cruz, CA

Not true, not true.  Local city council races are oftentimes very close, even if it's between two candidates you disagree with - one you're less likely to disagree with, and city council races almost have entirely different things that don't correspond to party affiliation.

[Citizen James]

Even when there is a one party stranglehold on the general election, there's still hairs to be split in the primaries.

Neither loyalty oaths nor political compass scores are required to join a party, so if you're in a one-party state/town, you can still battle for the soul of the party, or at least to edge them over a bit toward reason.

[© tweed]

Yes, you should think of all the people in Africa and the Middle East who would stand outside for 3 days for the right to vote.  Also, there are probably some kind of competitive races somewhere on the ballot.

[phk]

Yes, you should think of all the people in Africa and the Middle East who would stand outside for 3 days for the right to vote.  Also, there are probably some kind of competitive races somewhere on the ballot.

All those elections are rigged anyway.

[Bono]

Voting is pointless anywaym and is initiation of force.

[Alcon]

Voting is pointless anywaym and is initiation of force.

Huh?

[© tweed]

Yes, you should think of all the people in Africa and the Middle East who would stand outside for 3 days for the right to vote.  Also, there are probably some kind of competitive races somewhere on the ballot.

All those elections are rigged anyway.

I meant, they'd wait outside for 3 days to vote in a fair election, obviously.

[John Dibble]

Voting is pointless anywaym and is initiation of force.

Huh?

I think he's extending the logic that government is basically a form of coercion/force(and if you get down to it it really is), and thus he's saying voting is an attempt to get people in who would do what you'd like the government to force people to do. However, since I recognize that a minimal level of government is necessary for a civil society to exist, I would disagree that it is pointless - I would vote for the person who would use the least unnecessary force possible with the end intention of keeping government at a minimum.

[Erc]

Where I live, the major races were all boring as hell...

There was never any question that Kerry, Schumer, Lowey, and Paulin were going to win.

However, we had a rather interesting three-way State Senate race (Republican v. Democrat v. Conservative--the conservative was a Democrat who tried to get the Republican nomination and failed) after our former Senator got put in prison a couple times.  The real Democrat won, but narrowly.

The State Senate race next door, the Republican won by 17 votes...not decided till February.

Up in Irvington, they still haven't figured out who won the election for mayor.  The Democrat challenger was up by one vote, but then one absentee vote got thrown out, so now it's tied.  I think the current mayor (Republican) is still running the town as if he won re-election--personally I don't think this will be settled before the next election.

So, yes, your votes do matter, even when you're in a supposedly "safe" area.

And if you are in a ridiculously "safe" area, odds are you'll have interesting primaries from time to time, if not general elections.

[MissCatholic]

Voting is one of the most important things you can do. Everybody must vote.

I like the Australian system but i understand why people are against forced voting. but we should do it out of respect for the men and women that lost their lifes in wars past to grant us this free right.

[angus]

Is voting wortwhile if you live in a solid state?

well, even though the particle velocity is slower in the solid state than in the liquid or vapor states, the density is usually greater, so the probability of reaction between particles can be thusly enhanced.  though I still prefer remaining in the vapor state most of the time.  Just like the way it feels. 

that said, I have nothing against the solid state folks.  But the liquids and vapors are in a minority, as a percent of all matter.  If we could unite, we may prove a formidable voting bloc against the solid states.

[Alcon]

Is voting wortwhile if you live in a solid state?

well, even though the particle velocity is slower in the solid state than in the liquid or vapor states, the density is usually greater, so the probability of reaction between particles can be thusly enhanced.  though I still prefer remaining in the vapor state most of the time.  Just like the way it feels. 

that said, I have nothing against the solid state folks.  But the liquids and vapors are in a minority, as a percent of all matter.  If we could unite, we may prove a formidable voting bloc against the solid states.

Hahaha.

[KEmperor]

Is voting wortwhile if you live in a solid state?

well, even though the particle velocity is slower in the solid state than in the liquid or vapor states, the density is usually greater, so the probability of reaction between particles can be thusly enhanced.  though I still prefer remaining in the vapor state most of the time.  Just like the way it feels. 

that said, I have nothing against the solid state folks.  But the liquids and vapors are in a minority, as a percent of all matter.  If we could unite, we may prove a formidable voting bloc against the solid states.

amusing