The Horrible Esthete Wrote:Fair enough.
How about this:
If one is so lazy, apathetic, or uneducated that he will not or cannot ascertain which candidate better represents his interests (or which candidate is less apt to operate counter to his interests), then he should not cast a vote.
My apologies to Tiger.
Being apathetic is not a character flaw, by the way. It's a perfectly normal way to live, given the way the governments in Canada and the US continue to waste funds, give false promises, and lie to the taxpayers on a daily basis. I have seen the corruption in politics, first hand, many times in my own riding and many times affecting me DIRECTLY. So, you can vote and that is your right but I'm not gonna vote just to please people like you. If I vote, it'll be because I have something worth voting for. Me choosing to not vote has nothing to do with being uneducated or lazy, either, but nice try. This US election question is all a hypothetical for me since I'm Canadian, but for the sake of this argument, we can pretend like I'm a US citizen. Ok, I've seen, heard,and read much more than I wanted to about the top two candidates. I've done enough research to know that neither one would be worth my vote if I had one. Neither Barack nor Mccain represent my interests enough for me to vote. I'm not gonna vote for a guy just because I agree with one or two of his polilcies. That's simply not enough.
tigerthelion Wrote:The Horrible Esthete Wrote:Fair enough.
How about this:
If one is so lazy, apathetic, or uneducated that he will not or cannot ascertain which candidate better represents his interests (or which candidate is less apt to operate counter to his interests), then he should not cast a vote.
My apologies to Tiger.
Being apathetic is not a character flaw, by the way. It's a perfectly normal way to live, given the way the governments in Canada and the US continue to waste funds, give false promises, and lie to the taxpayers on a daily basis. I have seen the corruption in politics, first hand, many times in my own riding and many times affecting me DIRECTLY. So, you can vote and that is your right but I'm not gonna vote just to please people like you. If I vote, it'll be because I have something worth voting for. Me choosing to not vote has nothing to do with being uneducated or lazy, either, but nice try. This US election question is all a hypothetical for me since I'm Canadian, but for the sake of this argument, we can pretend like I'm a US citizen. Ok, I've seen, heard,and read much more than I wanted to about the top two candidates. I've done enough research to know that neither one would be worth my vote if I had one. Neither Barack nor Mccain represent my interests enough for me to vote. I'm not gonna vote for a guy just because I agree with one or two of his polilcies. That's simply not enough.
I have to agree with you, and Skippy on this one, that's why I didn't vote in the last Canadian election
It's a message board. I get bored from time to time and and have a mind of my own about a variety of issues. Why is that such a big deal? What should I do about hockey? Become the NHL commissioner or do you want me to buy an NHL team so I can have a say in the rules? What shall I do about politics? It takes millions of people to make a change. I can't suddenly make politicians honourable. I can, however, vote for a politician that I think is honourable, if I ever actually see one in my lifetime. I guess I should sit back on my couch and accept all the bullshit fed my way and go along with it, like you and people like you seem content to do. :roll: Sure, I could run for office but I'd rather not give up my work and money to do that. The entire system needs changing. Even if I got elected, I'd still make no difference in the large scheme of things. Sure, I could be out protesting in my spare time but I don't think I'll do that. I'm just giving my opinion on a message board. So what. Is that not what messageboards are for? What am I missing here?
tommygunn Wrote:tigerthelion Wrote:tommygunn Wrote:Either vote or run for office yourself if you think you can do better.. :thumb:
Wow, that's a great answer. That's like something the almighty Jon Stewart would say. Wow, you completely changed my views. I'll get right on that. :?
No, you seem to be content in just whining and doing nothing but that.. as usual. :roll:
Great answer. :rambo: So, if we don't have the right not to vote, I guess we aren't really a free nation afterall.
tigerthelion Wrote:tommygunn Wrote:tigerthelion Wrote:Wow, that's a great answer. That's like something the almighty Jon Stewart would say. Wow, you completely changed my views. I'll get right on that. :?
No, you seem to be content in just whining and doing nothing but that.. as usual. :roll:
Great answer. :rambo: So, if we don't have the right not to vote, I guess we aren't really a free nation afterall.
No.. you're obviously free to not vote; just sit back and whine on a band fansite and do nothing but that.. all the while being "affected directly by corruption".. great country, isn't it? :thumb:
Keep bending over.. the people in charge love your kind.. :lol:
skippy the wonder dog Wrote:VioletlightHeron Wrote:Telling people that you know their own interests better than they do is really condescending.
Where did I say that? I didn't say that at all.
I simply pointed out that there is another perspective. Or are you telling me that there is only one valid perspective on politics, and it happens to be yours?
That's what Esthete's saying -- anyone who doesn't share his perspective is lazy or ignorant, and doesn't know his own interests -- but I don't see you taking him to task for being condescending.
Perhaps we're just interpreting Esthete's comment differently, I interpret his comment as saying while there are issues about Senator McCain (his incoherence on talking publicly about economic issues, his original stance on immigration issues are key flaws for me) that he doesn't like; there are more important policy issues that Senator Obama has favored that scares the crap out of him (his inexperience and his stances of foreign policy are keys for me) that makes him favor McCain over Obama. In my opinion, you come across as an absolutionist, ie if neither candidate fits your exact criteria necessary for voting in their favor, then you are just gonna take your ball and go home. If you just go home and pout in the corner, are the people in charge going to even notice your absence? They aren't going to notice and will continue to woo voters, only the problem is that the political system will continue to favor those who vote for somebody who promises them the most goodies and ignore the people who protest silently out of principle, rather than casting a vote for none of the above to register their personal disgust with the system.
And by the way, was the term 'dupes" not supposed to convey the impression that you are smarter than the rest of us or is there a Skippy's Grammatical Terms book that I didn't get the memo on?
tommygunn Wrote:Who said anything about joining a political party?
You did say "vote or run yourself." But I suppose we can run as independents....
The problem is, we focus too much on voting, as if this is what makes democracy work. But the reality is that writing one good letter to your MP between elections is far more effective than going out to vote. So if you mean do that to get involved, fair enough. But run yourself, not so much.
VioletlightHeron Wrote:Perhaps we're just interpreting Esthete's comment differently, I interpret his comment as saying while there are issues about Senator McCain ....
VLH, pull your head out of the specifics of your election. I'm not talking about whether I'd vote for McCain or Obama, I'm talking about whether refusing to vote
in any given election is a legitimate stance. I argue it is, if you feel there is no candidate who represents you. Esthete suggests that if you can't figure out which candidate is better for you, and vote for him, you're ignorant and apathetic.
That's a pretty clear case of suggesting that I'm (hypothetically) not smart enough to know what's good for me. So I turned it around on him.
You call my attitude condescending, and give his use of words like "ignorant" and "lazy" a free ride?
Come on.
Every vote counts:
I was working in my local city hall a couple of years ago for work.
My partner and I were done and we were sitting in the comptroller's office.
Another city official came in and he and the comptroller started discussing some situation with some other employee. They started joking around and saying "we are not supposed to be discussing this together at work" "we are supposed to be handling this in an open forum"
And then they both made phone calls one after the other on the same phone almost harrasing some guy to try and intimidate him for some reason - laughing the whole time when they were done.
The election was one or two months later and when I saw the one guys name on the ballot I remembered how much of what happened in that office that bugged me - so I voted for the other guy on the ballot.
The guy lost by ONE vote - I kid you not.
Every vote counts.
I just voted for real. Always feels good. I'm batting .600 in my five previous presidential election votes. Here's hoping for .666 -- number of the beast implications, aside.
skippy the wonder dog Wrote:Esthete suggests that anyone who doesn't share his perspective is lazy or ignorant, and doesn't know his own interests .
cratch: You know damn well that isn't what I "suggested".
You need to stop spinning things to the extreme (maybe politics is your calling after all).
I said that
IF one is so lazy, apathetic, or uneducated that he will not or cannot ascertain which candidate better represents his interests (or which candidate is less apt to operate counter to his interests), then he should not cast a vote.
And I said that in reference to Tiger's initial comment, which was "
it's time to stop voting for the lesser of two evils", referring
specifically to
Obama and McCain.
In THIS country's presidential elections, the two main candidates consistently have significant political, ideological, or socioeconomic differences, and this one is no different. If any of the past 10 US presidential elections leave you thinking that the two main candidates are like "six or a half dozen", then your political interests are "all over the map" and are likely highly incongruent with one another.
Unless a prospective voter does not make an effort to identify the significant differences between the two main candidates (lazy or apathetic), or is unable to recognize which one is better or worse for his particular interests (uneducated on the issues and platforms and how they may affect him personally), it is virtually impossible for that voter to find himself thinking that both candidates
equally do not represent his interests.
If a voter should choose not to vote for
either candidate because neither does enough to "please" him,
despite one being clearly WORSE for him, then that is his right.
But that seems to be a decision that willfully neglects one's concerns his own well-being, and is a waste of an important fundamental privelege, but....whatever.
The Horrible Esthete Wrote:I said that IF one is so lazy, apathetic, or uneducated that he ... cannot ascertain which candidate better represents his interests....
... which clearly implies that anyone who sees six of one, and a half-dozen of the other -- anyone who does not share your perspective, that one
must be the better choice -- is "lazy, apathetic, or uneducated."
QED.
When you said "his perspective", I thought you meant my particular view of which candidate is "the better choice". My bad.
Which brings us right back to the fact that if you have any interests, leanings, or personal stake in the US economy, job market, tax code, national security, supreme court, education, health care, social security etc., one of the candidates in this presidential election (and every other presidential election in this country, for that matter) will emerge as a better (or worse) representative of your interests, leanings, or stakes if you take the initiative to investigate and have the ability to prioritize what matters most to you. It may be Obama, it may be McCain. Either way, the two are different enough that it's virtually impossible for one not to be a better (or worse) option for any given voter.
If someone wants to bury his head and refuse to recognize or acknowledge those differences, I guess that's his own loss.
Perhaps you guys need to debunk the Canadian myth. I understand you are "the policy weary commune on the untamed land". Why attack Rob? He tried to tell you but apparently his act of political theater/art fell upon deaf ears. I think he was trying to show you a portrait of your parents Priminister and asked you to consider the portrait your painting for your children. The man is a :censored patriot and you have the balls to insult him?
The Canada the world loves is the Canada your grandparents built. Patriotism is more then Sewing a flag on your backpack and singing the national anthem at the top of your lungs.
Rights and Responsibilities of Canadian Citizenship
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.rsscanadaimmigration.com/en/citizenship/rights.php">http://www.rsscanadaimmigration.com/en/ ... rights.php</a><!-- m -->
All Canadian Citizen’s whether born or naturalized have Rights and Responsibilities accrued to them upon receipt of their citizenship. These rights and responsibilities must be maintained and are based on Canadian Laws and the shared values of the society. Many of these are defined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is part of the Constitution of Canada. Certain of the rights and responsibilities are listed herewith and are tested as part of the Citizenship test.
Rights and Freedoms
- legal rights;
- equality rights;
- mobility rights;
- Aboriginal peoples’ rights;
- freedom of thought;
- freedom of speech;
- freedom of religion; and
- the right to peaceful assembly
- legal rights;
- apply for a passport,
- run in elections, and
- right to vote in elections
Responsibilities
- understand and obey Canada’s laws;
- express opinions freely while respecting the rights and freedoms of others; and
- help others in the community;
- care for and protect our heritage and environment;
- eliminate discrimination and injustice.
-
vote in elections( municipal, provincial and federal)
- support Canada’s ideals in building the country
If you do not participate in your democracy you fail in your duty as a free citizen. Go ahead and rationalize your laziness while your countrymen fight and die in a foreign land in an illegal occupation.
NegPhil, I'd be stung by your criticism of my poor citizenship, but the office of our Governor General recognized my poor citizenship already, back in '92, when they took advantage of the 125th anniversary of the Confederation of Canada to recognize the poor citizenship of 42,000 Canadians.
I don't have anything to prove.