Why Should I Vote?
I’ll admit it. I was this close to drinking the Kool Aid. I was starting to believe that Obama as President would make a difference. Then I found out that Obama is opposed to impeaching Bush or Dick.
“There’s a way to bring an end to those practices, you know: vote the bums out,” [Obama] said, without naming Bush or Cheney. “That’s how our system is designed.”
Bzzzt. Wrong answer. Our system is also designed with a system of checks and balances between the branches of government. Congress is shirking its duty to check the power of the presidency. Simply letting Bush and Dick leave office as their term expires doesn’t send the right message to future presidents. We need to kick them out and let the world know we won’t accept criminals in our White House.
The Democrats were voted into office because the people wanted the troops to come home and the President to have a real opposition party. Since taking power, the Democrats have managed to rubber stamp Bush’s warrantless domestic spying and escalate the war (and they have the worst confidence rating since Gallup began keeping record—14%). But they still don’t get it.
Obama is more of the same ol’ same ol’. His PR has painted him as the charming new face of political change, yet he refuses to admit that our soldiers are dying in vain the war on an abstract noun.
I’m feeling broken-spirited and powerless to protect myself from the slow attrition of my liberties. I’m beginning to see that my vote doesn’t matter. Whether Republicrats or Demicans are in office seems to make no difference. There will be more of the same. Those in power trot out some new faces every couple of years to reassure us, the voting masses, that we have the power to affect change. Too little do we suspect that it’s all a sham.
Both parties largely represent the same goals and agenda. Abortion, war, civil liberties, education are nothing more to the politicians than flags to wave to distract us from their real concern: power and the status quo. The better to serve their corporate masters.
I could vote for someone in another party who I believe would make real changes, but they don’t have a real chance of winning (yet?). To my recollection, no candidate that I have voted for has ever won a national election. Not a single one. Does that mean all my votes have been wasted? Have I been tricked into believing that my vote matters?
So tell me again: why should I vote?
Tags: citizenship, freedom, impeachment, politics, United States, vote
![[Earth Flag]](../../../../wp-content/images/earth-flag.png){kind=small}
![[Gadsden Flag]](../../../../wp-content/images/gadsden.png){kind=small}
![[Old Glory]](../../../../wp-content/images/old-glory.png){kind=small}
cybr said,
August 11, 2007 @ 12:13 pm
Tis’ better to ask for something and not get it, than to not ask for it and not get it.
August 11, 2007 @ 12:16 pm
I don’t know about that. Sometimes it’s more frustrating to be actively denied than to just suffer with your lack.
cybr said,
August 11, 2007 @ 12:33 pm
The other issue is when people complain to me about the presidents and reps we’ve had (both those I’ve voted for or against), bitching and moaning about things. My first question is did you vote? Not did you vote for or against but just vote. When the answer is ‘no’, I tell them they have no room to complain. If you voted for the person and they don’t live up to expectations or promises you can complain. If you voted against the person and they don’t do what you feel is right, needed, proper, whatever; then you can complain. If you didn’t vote at all, go stand in the corner and shut the hell up cause I don’t want to hear it. You have no reason to complain if you don’t want to be part of the process.
And this can be said for a lot of things. But, this is only coming from a nobody who has voted most of the time.
August 11, 2007 @ 12:40 pm
Let me try this on for size. The judicial system imprisons a man on false charges, ignoring evidence which would have exonerated him. He has no way to escape or prove his innocence. When he complains that he has no power to free himself, we should ask him whether he banged his head repeatedly against the door of his cell. If he says no, then we tell him he has no room to complain.
August 14, 2007 @ 11:20 am
Meh, I actually agree with Obama.
Politics is compromise, and the Constitution is steeped in compromise from day one. It’s the only way to get things done.
Really, the main check on Presidential power in a great many areas is the political process. Yes, impeachments are possible, but from a Constitutional Law standpoint there’s no real clear standard for when they are appropriate. Basically it boils down to “when Congress thinks its appropriate.”
Please understand me, I think Bush is a horrible president, one of the most horrible in history, and I think Americans who voted for him, especially in 04 for crying out loud, were incredibly foolish.
But honestly it’s tough to pin anything on him that rises to the level of criminal. I know the average liberal is going to swear at me for saying that, but frankly the average liberal (like the average Republican) knows fuck-all about the law and about the Constitution. That may be elitist of me, but I sincerely believe it to be the case.
He has done a lot of shady things, sure. Slimy things. But the real solution to “shady and slimy things” is don;t vote for him. You might not like it, but it’s kind of the way things actually are.
Now, can you impeach the President for shady and slimy things? Sure? If there’s no clear impeachment standard, then it can be bent both ways. But impeachment requires Congressional support that does not currently exist, and it involves a large expenditure of political capital to be spend on what would ultimately be at best a symbolic gesture, and at worst and empty one.
So, given that the constraints on impeachment are purely practical, it makes sense for Obama to say that impeachment isn’t really an option. Because it isn’t practical.
If you’re waiting for an uncompromising politician, you are going to have to wait for a long time. Our system does not really allow uncompromising politicians to succees, because our system is oo dependent on compromise for its functionality.
August 14, 2007 @ 11:40 am
Kullervo,
You’re not helping my faith in the system.
If voting is our only option, then I’m beginning to believe that we have no real options. We currently suffer under a duopoly (I think it’s more accurate to say a monopoly) that won’t give up it’s hold on power. From my perspective, my choices in the voting booth make me feel like I live in Soviet Russia where the only name on the ballot is the party candidate. Of course we have a diverse ballot, but the appearance of choice is a lie.
Voting has done nothing for me on the national level. Where I live, given the state and the way congressional districts have been drawn, assures that my vote will be meaningless. I have some hope of swinging a presidential or senatorial election, but that’s only if I choose a member of the duopoly. Here I am, pissing in the wind, hoping that the wind will change direction before I get too wet.
What you say is probably true, that impeachment isn’t a practical option, but sometimes symbolic gestures are all we’ve got.
I’m getting quite cynical, I admit. I’m beginning to think that our political system has too much inertia to make the changes necessary for the survival of the great experiment in democracy. I think it will fall apart as soon as the economic good times leave the United States for good. The only thing holding us together is that we make money.
Anna said,
August 24, 2007 @ 8:52 am
Unfortunately, it seems the best person doesn’t win the election, but the person who’s the most middle of the line. Sad truth, really.
In this day and age, the impeachment process would take longer than Bush has left in office, and that process doesn’t remove him from office. After the impeachment proceedings then the proceedings to remove him from office can begin. (Remember impeachment was also started against Clinton who did not have sex with that woman.)
Out of curiosity, how did you feel about Clinton? Bush I? Regan?
As far as not voting, my own opinion is if you don’t vote then you don’t have the right to complain about who’s elected. I vote so I have the right to complain. Simple.
August 24, 2007 @ 9:01 am
I want my symbolic gesture.
Out of curiosity, how did you feel about Clinton? Bush I? Regan?
My opinions are changing as my political sensibilities take a hard left turn. I’m warming to Clinton while my admiration for Bush I and Reagan is cooling.
As far as not voting, my own opinion is if you don’t vote then you don’t have the right to complain about who’s elected. I vote so I have the right to complain. Simple.
But can I complain about who’s on the ballot even if I don’t vote?
Anna said,
August 24, 2007 @ 9:45 am
Yes, they’re campaigning and fair game.
I too find my opinions are changing as I’m pulling away from the views of my parents and forming my own.
In the spirit of full disclosure, since I asked the question, I will comment about my views of the former presidents. Clinton knew how to play the game and Regan, well, I was 8 when he left office, so I really can’t say much about him from personal knowledge or experience. But he seemed to have it together and knew the game, even if he was Christian. As for the Bushes, don’t they belong in the yard?
It seems for the voters that all it’s really about is playing the game. The “best” presidents figured out the rules and played by them. So much for the system. I don’t have any faith in it anyway.
August 24, 2007 @ 10:38 am
The problem as I see it is to design an election process that selects for the best candidate. Of course the easy part is stating the problem. The hard part is designing a solution. The current system appears to be biased for good looking men with lots of money and the willingness to say whatever the electorate wants to hear while planning to do something completely different.
Anna said,
August 24, 2007 @ 12:12 pm
That’s the election process in a nutshell, but then, how to do explain Bush II? Good looking: not so much; lots of money: he’s got that; willingness to say whatever the elctorate wants to hear: if he can spit it out.
August 24, 2007 @ 12:35 pm
I forgot to add friends who can “finesse” close races in key states.