Assuming there’s nothing stopping you from legally voting

  • Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I usually don’t think to. I mostly just scroll All sorted by active so there’s lots of people already voting on those posts. Plus my instance is upvote-only

  • Bob@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m not allowed because I’m an immigrant, and I’ve only found out recently that I can vote while living abroad in national elections in the fatherland.

  • miak@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    When all of the candidates on a ballot are going to actively work against my values, why would I vote for any of them? That said, I have written in choices before, but it’s a lot of work to do when literally no one will be taking notice of that vote.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Because one and only one of them might put you in a prison camp, and destroy the machinery by which you might ever hope to elect someone who would align with your values, without having to fight a war for it?

      Or maybe, “only” deport 18 million people who didn’t do anything. But hey! If none of those 18 million is you or your family, that’d be okay. And you got to make your statement.

      • miak@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        If I really cared about making a statement, I’d put more effort into regularly heading into polls to write-in my choice. I still would not be voting for either of the major parties.

  • Tarogar@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Depends on what is getting voted on. Posts on Lemmy? Eh… Maybe if I find them especially good or bad. Can’t be bothered otherwise.

    In that one instance where I didn’t vote… It was a local election with exactly two candidates. One of which told ahead of election day that should he win he would refuse to take office. So yeah… Didn’t bother with that.

      • Tarogar@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Good question… If I remember correctly his motivation was to give a choice besides the only person that would have been on the ballot otherwise. Perhaps a moral choice because he thought that there should be at least another choice even if the result is the same in a good democracy.

        And it’s a good right to exercise for everyone even if you then choose not to take that position for one reason or another. Who knows what reason someone has, maybe just to be more well known…

  • Kaiyoto@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I didn’t vote for years because I was busy trying to keep my head above water and I just couldn’t wrap my head around politics. I had my own shit to deal with during that time.

    • Fades@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      It’s one day, with most states allowing mail-in in advance. You have no excuse for not fulfilling your duty as a citizen to ensure least negative outcome of elections.

      I had my own shit to deal with

      So does every other fucking adult, and now we have even more shit to deal with, thanks for that

      • howrar@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        It takes one day to do the actual voting. It takes a lot more time to figure out who to vote for.

      • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        He’s saying he didn’t even know what was happening. I bet trump won 2016 because in some peoples minds “it’s boll clintons wife vs the guy from the pizza hut ads…well I LIKE pizza!”

        Before trump won, his “policies” weren’t well known. It’s hard to remember, but when he won, people were surprised that the joke candidate won. I’m sure some people clueless to politics did it for the lulz.

  • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Voting is harder in the US. I can almost get that the one party has made it more difficult to vote because it benefits that party. I am ever in awe at the hardship americans can sometimes endure to vote, and then see it nullified.

    Voting in Canada is quaint but effective: I go to a polling place, I - now, Americans, this is gonna offend you - bring my driver’s license to prove my ID, they write a line through my name on a piece of paper, I take the paper fn ballot behind the cardboard half-screen like it’s high-school, and mark a big X in a few boxes, fold it and drop it into another cardboard box carefully marked ‘ballots’. Then people count them by hand and by the end of the night we’re 100% done.

    Not everyone has a system as simple and effective. It’s a massive effort to vote in America, and I’d love to see that fixed as well.

    • okamiueru@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      The last four times I’ve voted. I spent, on average, less than ten minutes from arriving at the place to vote, and leaving that place. And I don’t mean at the booth itself. I’d say from when I parked the car, to when I left in the car… but I walked. 10 minutes (the first 3 times) and after moving, 5 minutes last time.

      It’s amazing how shit things can get, when enough people deliberately want to make it more shit. You know who and what I’m talking about. If not, I’d be happy to clarify.

    • angstylittlecatboy@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Living in a state with universal mail-in voting, I honestly think I just don’t understand how hard it is in states without that.

  • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago
    1. Laziness / lack of any urgency that it will matter or make a difference to them personally
    2. They’re a disinformation campaign, and taking time telling you about refusing to vote is their attempt to influence the election

    I suspect that almost everyone will fall into one of those two categories

    • fishos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      “Doctors of Reddit…”

      “I’m not a doctor, but…”

      That’s your energy right there. Came in here hoping for actual answers and this trash comment is top. Pure speculation from someone on the opposite side.

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      1/3 of the possible voting populace doesn’t vote because they are told it won’t make a difference, when the last presidential election came down to a few thousand votes. Bugs the hell out of me.

      • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Even if you’re in a non “swing” state, the totals shifting in some new direction will influence it becoming a non swing state over time. It still matters. Both ways.

        This was the way the crazy people got abortion banned: They picked something that was crazy out of reach, and kept working for it until it was in reach. Instead of just saying “oh well who cares, it is difficult, I will wait until someone else makes it easy.”

        • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Exactly, the reason it happened is because we became complacent to the point where the only way to win votes for them was to win the craziest sector, they knew everyone else would just keep voting (or not voting). They campaigned constantly because people would froth at the mouth over it and they knew they were single issue voters.

          If the 1/3 of the people who don’t vote showed up in this election it could actually make a huge difference, hell it could show that the parties need to rethink their entire strategies. They still won’t though, but they should.

        • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          If the two unpopular candidates were perfectly equal then your argument might have weight, but in my book there’s one that’s horrible, and one that’s not great, but also not horrible.

          Politics never has a good candidate, it’s always between two bad choices. It’s just choosing the best of the two.

          • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Politics never has a good candidate, it’s always between two bad choices.

            Well now you’re catching on to why so many people don’t even bother. It’s almost as if these two parties want it that way so they can maintain their control. Why do you think the Democrats keep picking candidates that either lose or struggle to win against someone like Trump?

            • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              I guess in my thinking, if the act of not voting means you are okay with letting the worst candidate win, then by not voting it means I’m okay with a lot of innocent people being hurt by the horrid policies of the worse candidate. By voting for the lesser of two evils, I’m more saying “I don’t want that other candidate”.

              You’re trying to say it’s their plot to give you two candidates. What if their plot is instead to convince you not to vote, so their bad candidate gets in easier because you could have helped stop it?

              • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                What are you helping to stop when both candidates are terrible? You’re helping in the same way that “thoughts and prayers” helps people. You’re simply participating in a rigged game and thinking that your participation is some sort of moral choice and “doing the right thing” when in reality that feeling is just self-gratification.

                If you think you’re helping, why does the political landscape continue to devolve and slide further to the right regardless of who wins? Why are more and more people becoming poor and homeless while a handful of companies and individuals are reaping all the rewards? That’s the trajectory you’re arguing to help maintain here.

                • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Personally the farther left we go, the louder the right gets. To me, I see a losing battle that they’re desperately trying to win. They may win temporarily now and again, but overwhelmingly the younger generations are more liberal. It’s why we see the desperate grab for power now, they know even with the tricks it’s just a matter of time.

                  And for your first, I stand by what I said. Your assumption is that both candidates are equal, so what’s the point. Except from my point of view, one is vastly better than the alternative, so there is a point.

          • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Damn straight which is why the Dems handed a win to Trump in 2016 and why polling shows that he’s likely to win again this year. It takes careful choosing to pick someone that people dislike so much that he can’t even win against a bloated orange fascist.

          • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            When you compare our choices to eating shit or eating shit and lighting yourself on fire, is it really much of a question why people aren’t volunteering to do either of those things?

            • DudeImMacGyver@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              When those are the only two options, fuck yeah: Picking nothing is way worse than picking the least bad option. You’ll be either the metaphorical shit regardless, why risk worse?

              • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                Continuing to vote against the other candidate rather than voting for who you want allows them to keep doing worse and worse because that other party is always going to be there and always considered worse and supporters of that party will look at the other side and do the same. There is zero accountability for either side to the point where both candidates now openly support genocide and you have people arguing that “you’re a piece of shit for not supporting them.”

                By continuing to vocally support eating shit, you’re ensuring that in a few elections we’ll be supporting eating shit and lighting ourselves on fire because the other side will be eating shit, lighting ourselves on fire, and giving a rim job to a horse. To support our current system is to support a race to the bottom.

                • DudeImMacGyver@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  People can and should criticize flaws, but to not vote because you don’t like either choice solves absolutely nothing, guaranteeing only that things will get worse. Your argument simply does not hold up and you’re arguing against something I never claimed.

                  We should continue to push for and work towards things like ranked choice voting, but letting the worst of the worst win is guaranteed to prevent progress.

            • Jikiya@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              One is going to be picked for you either way. Not voting doesn’t stop the shit eating from happening, just allows the lighting on fire to also happen.

              By choosing the less shit option, politicians will see they need to be less shit to get elected, eventually to the point of maybe even having good candidates. Allowing the worst candidate to win tells the politicians they can get worse and still have their coveted power.

              • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                By choosing the less shit option, politicians will see they need to be less shit to get elected, eventually to the point of maybe even having good candidates.

                This is demonstrably false. After Obama was elected twice we got Trump. Clinton was picked in 2016 and was so terrible that she couldn’t beat the orange turd. After her loss they gave us a “status quo” clone of her who barely managed to defeat the orange turd. Now we’re faced with the exact same choice and polling shows that it’s likely to end up like it did in 2016. Both parties continue to move further and further right regardless of who’s getting elected and we’re being forced to choose from the same tiny pool of candidates every election even though there are hundreds of millions of people in this country.

    • ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I think there’s a third category, though may be a small offset of the first. Those who would like to, but don’t have the day off and can’t afford it.

      • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        They’re gonna have trouble affording smuggled oranges and tinned meat, too, when they’re in the camps with bread and water as the standard food.

        I’m not tryin to sit in judgement. But also, this one is fuckin important.

        • dactylotheca@suppo.fi
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Well it maybe be fuckin important but people have to fuckin eat and have a roof over their fuckin heads, too

    • oxjox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      If you’re not someone who doesn’t vote and you’re simply speculating, I would suggest you delete this comment.

      • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I will give your suggestion 100% of the careful attention and obedience that it deserves.

        • oxjox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          OP deserves someone participating in the conversation who can honestly answer the question they’ve asked. Your speculation only adds to the ignorance others already have. You are enforcing an echo chamber and being disrespectful.

          • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I mean your comment isn’t 100% off base. I was just being a little prickly about it for reasons that will become clear below – so the reason I chimed in is:

            1. Me saying my piece on it in no way makes it difficult for others who want to answer the question to give the answers OP deserves.
            2. Some of the people who are going to answer this question who fall into category #2 are going to lie, by definition, and I think it’s relevant to point that out and be able to talk about it (that that factor is relevant to the discussion). If everyone was coming into this discussion and telling the truth, then yes it would be inappropriate for someone else to come in and say what those other people’s answers were probably going to be.

            A long debate about whether or not there are political astroturf accounts on Lemmy is probably off topic here, so I made a thread which might be a little more suited to it.

  • Vanth@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I knew I was going to be out of town for voting day and started working to get an absentee ballot three months out. I got my ballot in the mail a week after it was due for me to send in to be counted.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    My mom never registered to vote “because I don’t want to be picked for jury duty!” (stupid boomer face)

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m not sure the election system is not fixed.

    But I would vote in this election if I were American. A lot is at stake. Which old man will smell the most.

  • Kangy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m from the UK, I don’t vote simply because I don’t trust the shit politicians come out with during election periods and because of this I worry I will vote the wrong way. Time and time again promises are made and you never really seem to see the difference.

    For example, and please correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s been promised since Brexit more money will go into the NHS to release the pressure on the service. Yet the NHS seems to be in the worst condition currently it’s ever been in.

    • phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      The NHS is bad by design. You can’t convert a great system to whatever the shit is in the US that makes. Avery select few people very rich. You first need to break it down by pulling money out of it, pull more money out of it, more still, then when it starts breaking down, complain about how badly it works and propose this wonderful new system that will fix all of that! Privatize everything and then move to whatever shit they have in the US and get rich

        • craftyindividual@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Our railways are fucked, our healthcare system is hanging by a thread. I’m so grateful for NHS care and investigations in the last year - dread to think how much Americans would have to pay to find out they have a shitty disease, let alone treat it.