Where's the logic in a voter boycott?

Sure, let's become even less involved in our nation's politics, and while the country descends further into fascism, the media will have the easy out and blame our apathy.

Fuck that. Vote. Write no confidence on the ballot but at least vote.

Thank you.

Just also wanted to point out some numbers:

And because a mass boycott of voting is what they fear most (how can an election be legitimate if only 25% voted?)

If this is 'what they fear the most', then they're damn close to it already.

In an election year, only 60% of people vote in the US. Outside of election years, only 40%.

So in 2004, during that oh-so-close presidential election, only 60% of the people had voted.

And it was about 50/50 (or 45/45/10, thereabouts): Which means less than 30% of the total population of the US was responsible for voting Dubya into office again. That's awfully close to that 25% figure quoted.

No, 'voting boycotts' are not what TPTB fear. They count on them, and rely on them. As a citizen in this country, giving up your vote is equivalent to giving up your voice. You aren't 'saying' anything by not voting. Literally: You are being mute. You're not protesting. You're not being clever. You're just being mute and not being heard.

Also, FYI: If you don't vote and yet still complain about politics? You're a huge part of the problem in this country. You need to vote. If you can legally do so, voting is the biggest power the citizens have. Vote, guys. Don't listen to the guy who made a post and then immediately deleted the account. He's just trying to fuck with you. Go vote. I don't care who you're voting for: Go vote.

Also, FYI: If you don't vote and yet still complain about politics? You're a huge part of the problem in this country.

People have the right not to vote and at the same time express their political opinion. Their decision is no less valid then someone who halfheartedly votes for a candidate that is the lesser of two evils.

To me Sanders is nothing but a sacrificial offering to the liberal left to keep them satiated until the "close" but inevitable primary win by Clinton. She cannot run unopposed after all?

It is also apparent that Bush will sail into the conservative nomination with a field so wide it's almost comical.

The game is rigged. If you want to participate in the "Mockery of Democracy" (WWE PPV) then by all means enjoy. But don't fool yourself for one minute into believing your vote actually matters at the end of the day. It's all political theatre designed to make us feel like we're a part of the process.

Regardless of the candidate or the message the end result will be a further continuance of business as usual.

But don't fool yourself for one minute into believing your vote actually matters at the end of the day. It's all political theatre designed to make us feel like we're a part of the process.

Ironically, by not voting, you aren't at all a part of the process (whether your assumptions are correct or not).

So either way, in your view, your fucked.

Sorry, but I'm not a defeatist. This opinion of yours is very much a defeatist one though.

This opinion of yours is very much a defeatist one though.

I consider myself a realist. My point is that the process itself has become a farce, a parody of what it once was and I refuse to play along. I wholeheartedly believe that our country is doomed if we continue this charade of two party politics with pre-determined, cookie cutter candidates full of empty rhetoric and bald faced lies. Once elected they only serve themselves and those who help them to maintain power.

Real change doesn't happen in the voting booth because all the options on the ballot lead to acceptable and controllable outcomes for those who truly have the power to influence the governance of our country.

Who decides which candidates get on the ballots? Who decides which candidates make it into the mostly scripted debates? Who decides which candidates get MSM airtime and whether that airtime is negative or positive? If you think it's the American people I own a bridge in Manhattan you may be interested in purchasing.

I know many people disagree with me and that's okay. But it's painfully obvious to me and many others that America has been hijacked by big business for the better part of the last century and by continuing to play their game we are only reinforcing their ever tightening control over our day to day lives.

So work backwards: have you ever considered running for political office yourself? Don't laugh, I'm serious.

Your argument rests on the idea that every candidate at any time is bought and paid for, at every level. That's what you're asserting when you talk about the whole thing being rigged. Do you really believe that?

I'm not laughing, it makes me sad truly. Running for office would be worse than voting, an endorsement of the system as it exists today. As I said before the entire process from the ground floor up serves only the powerful. Even if an ideal candidate wins they face insurmountable odds against a long entrenched and well oiled machine designed to wear them down and remove or suppress them until they are no longer a danger.

The vast majority of politicians are corrupt to some extent at every single level. It is a culture unto itself and you cannot succeed without cunning and a willingness to play the game. The good ones are marginalized, made to look extreme, blackmailed, extorted, manipulated and forced to heel using a wide variety of subversive techniques. They are pummeled into oblivion well before they ever have a chance to effect true change.

The sad truth is that money has always been and always will be the true master of humanity. Greed will rot it's way into the truest of hearts if given half the chance.

A representative is a representative, not their own person. They're all "bought and paid for" whether that's on account of capitulating to the wishes of the voters, or to the donors (whose money buys goodwill among the voters).

In any case, the 'system' is but a shadow of our rose-colored memories and of what it could have been. It's been shown that voting by ordinary people has NO EFFECT on policy outcomes.

The analysts found that when controlling for the power of economic elites and organized interest groups, the influence of ordinary Americans registers at a "non-significant, near-zero level." The analysts further discovered that rich individuals and business-dominated interest groups dominate the policymaking process. The mass-based interest groups had minimal influence compared to the business-based interest groups.

From "Who Rules America?"

That said, change, and IMPORTANT change, can still occur at the local government level. The revolution will be starting (has started, actually) in our homes and on the streets of our neighborhoods, so local change is where it's at IMO.

I don't think real change can happen at the local level anymore either. It's even easier to manipulate small ball when you have big bucks. You see it all the time. Small town candidates with big ideals who come to office and soon realize that they belong to one party or the other and if they don't do things a certain way they'll soon be looking for new employment. Next thing you know they walk back the positions that got them elected and come up with the thinnest of of excuses to rationalize their new stance. Which almost 100% of the time has them falling in line with their party.

Its easy to get caught up in despair. I've done it myself. But the key is have optimism because without it you can't win at something like this.

Imagine a candidate backed by so many people that it becomes an undeniable fact that peaceful political change is impossible when he's stifled at the end. Imagine what that will do to wake people up.

I support Sanders, his ideas are the best for right now, from a technocratic point of view.

"If you vote, you have no right to complain."

That is the kind of thinking and action that has led us to where we are. When a majority don't vote the minority gets to decide the outcome for the rest. Doesn't matter that only 25% vote, it will still be a legitimate election because the other 75% of voters were being pussies or don't want to get involved.

Except you can only meaningfully vote for people propped up by corporate interests, the media ensure a third party vote is wasted. And if it wasn't they'd just rig the results anyway.

Again, delusions perpetrated by those already in power. A group doesn't start as the majority, it becomes it through effort and perseverance, something most Americans know nothing about anymore.

I think the best vote is a non-vote. It indicates dissatisfaction with a broken political system. If you vote, you are tacitly approving of the political system in power.

Does it really matter who is in office? Both parties and candidates offer but slight differences. The same basic assumptions dominate both parties — imperialism, free-market economics, monetary corruption, suspension of civil liberties, etc. The only differences are shallow social issues, designed to give the false appearance of choice and freedom.

EXACTLY why you need to get off your ass and do something about it! Bernie is a legit chance to change things. While I agree 100% with your comment about the system, that system will work if the PEOPLE make it work. Your apathy about changing the system is exactly the intended result of all the propaganda they put out. I have been voting my conscience for decades and my candidate has never won. Join us my friend, we must try!

What you are saying is that you don't turn in your homework or show up to class and still expect to pass.

Sometimes we have to do things we don't like, or agree with, to enact/enable the change we are aiming for.

Not voting does no good. Voting numbers have been low for years, and, believe me, you aren't the first person to think not voting will make a change. But the fact is that the only change is negative. Your voice is not heard. Your no vote is not important and does not effect anything.

Voting changes the numbers game played by the corporations backing the big politicians. By not voting you are making it so candidates need fewer votes to win. Candidates that don't have your interests in mind. The best bet is to vote, vote for who you believe in. Convince others to as well and enact change. By voting you are making it so other candidates need more votes making it harder for them to get the votes needed. You make the numbers skewed and the numbers game becomes trickier.

People need to stop waiting for the media to decide the candidates and issues. They need to stop waiting for the media to remind them of the "political season". Politics is 24/7/365, as well as our lives. If we only care once every 4 years and then decide to not vote then it shouldn't be a shocker when things don't go the way we want.

A mass boycott is exactly what the people in power want. They want to let just few decide, while the people who are disenfranchised just sit back and take whatever is thrown at them. Bernie is targeting the people who have given up voting.

And because a mass boycott of voting is what they fear most (how can an election be legitimate if only 25% voted?)

hahahaha ELECTORAL COLLEGE will legitimize any shortfalls in the voting record. Surely you remember this.

You know who votes no matter what? Jesus freaks. You want them deciding what's right for this country any more than they already do?

ITT: people think their votes count

They're drinking the koolaid just like in 08 with Paul.

Bernie is the tag-along they put in there to increase the voting participation from the gen-x/gen-y non voting population. Voting = consent to be governed.

It doesn't get anymore cynical than this my freinds.

[deleted]

[deleted]

I downvoted you for being a racist. I'm not voting for Sanders myself and further I'm not getting paid to support anyone.

You're also breaking the rules of this sub:

1. Posts that attack this sub, users or mods thereof, will be removed. Accusing another user of being a troll or shill can be viewed as an attack, depending on context. Repeat offenders are subject to a ban.

[deleted]

Did you even pretend to read your own words?

Bernie Sanders is a Jew ^{and a Zionist}, that's all you need to know.

If your issue was that he was a zionist, why mention the fact that he's Jewish? Not all Jews are Zionists. Further, not all Zionists are Jews.

No, your sentence literally reads that Sanders is a Jew (point 1) and a Zionist (point 2), and point 1 and point 2 are the reasons you shouldn't vote for him.

So you're either illiterate or yes, racist.

Here's an alternate sentence using the same structure about something totally different: tell me it's not racist.

Tookie Williams is a black guy and a murderer. That's all you need to know. I'm glad they executed him.

See how mentioning his skin color really makes it seem like I'm saying I'm glad they executed him because he's a black guy? If you can't see this, then I'm sorry, you may be illiterate. But you're probably just a racist.

Side note - a question to the people whom are about to downvote me over the day for pointing out yet-another-racist on /r/conspiracy: Why don't you racists wear your racism like a badge of pride? These are your honest beliefs; why are you always denying them when faced with questions?

You believe Jews are necessarily worse than everyone else. You believe they're worthy of harm/fear/attack/etc. So when someone calls you out for being racist... why do you racists consistently deny that you are? Do you just not understand what the term means?

I 'unno. It's weird to me. For example I have a problem with racism: I believe racism is wrong. So I act on it and call people out for it. It'd be like if I started denying that racism was wrong, all the while going about calling people racist as if they're doing wrong (they are). It doesn't make any sense.

For people who are so 'proud' and so vocal about their racism, it's just strange that they'll all do the exact same thing when you call them on it: "What, me racist? No of course not, zionism is what I'm talking about (and the Jews)."

[deleted]

You are anti-intelligent reasoning.

What?!

When did I say thing-one about caucasians?

You're just being a child now: "Nu uh! You are! I'm rubber you're glue!"

It's just so fucking pathetic. Seriously guys; if I were a racist, I'd like to think I could make my case a bit more convincingly. You guys had Hitler on your side to look up to – objectively, one of the best political orators in recorded history – and yet, here you sit just with your fingers plugging your ears pretending that by simply saying 'nu uh, you are', you've won your argument.

Good god, grow some fucking balls.

If I'm anti-semitic then you're anti-caucasian which is just as fucking racist.

Nobody is anti-Caucasian just because of your beliefs about Jews.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

While I would normally agree with you, you can't say "Bernie is a Jew......that's all you need to know" and expect that to fly.

Criticize Zionism by all means, criticize his stance on zionism, but leave judaism out of it unless you want to be labelled a racist.