Philosophy Now Forum

I can only think of one good reason, but it's got nothing to do with candidates or elections.

it's a bit like the Cold War. Nobody dares take down their arms (political influence in voting-situation) in fear of the other not being quite so willing to do so. So it's simply a question of: if I don't vote, there's a possibility that we get the worst of the already ill collection of candidates.

The Voice of Time wrote:it's a bit like the Cold War. Nobody dares take down their arms (political influence in voting-situation) in fear of the other not being quite so willing to do so. So it's simply a question of: if I don't vote, there's a possibility that we get the worst of the already ill collection of candidates.

My point is that even if you have a very strong feeling on an issue or a candidate, your vote will not have the slightest effect on the result of the election, so why go to the trouble of voting? It's just simple logic.

bobevenson wrote:

The Voice of Time wrote:it's a bit like the Cold War. Nobody dares take down their arms (political influence in voting-situation) in fear of the other not being quite so willing to do so. So it's simply a question of: if I don't vote, there's a possibility that we get the worst of the already ill collection of candidates.

My point is that even if you have a very strong feeling on an issue or a candidate, your vote will not have the slightest effect on the result of the election, so why go to the trouble of voting? It's just simple logic.

What the president chooses to do has a lot of effect, so voting, encouraging others to vote (In your preference), and keeping a voting culture alive as well as inspire does help, but it's a bit like religion, it helps because there are many people "stupid" enough to believe it, and a bit like economy and the "Invisible hand" argument, that if people just believe their efforts make a difference, if enough people believe it, it will multiply whatever they initially believed could be achieved.

The Voice of Time wrote:

bobevenson wrote:

The Voice of Time wrote:it's a bit like the Cold War. Nobody dares take down their arms (political influence in voting-situation) in fear of the other not being quite so willing to do so. So it's simply a question of: if I don't vote, there's a possibility that we get the worst of the already ill collection of candidates.

My point is that even if you have a very strong feeling on an issue or a candidate, your vote will not have the slightest effect on the result of the election, so why go to the trouble of voting? It's just simple logic.

What the president chooses to do has a lot of effect, so voting, encouraging others to vote (In your preference), and keeping a voting culture alive as well as inspire does help, but it's a bit like religion, it helps because there are many people "stupid" enough to believe it, and a bit like economy and the "Invisible hand" argument, that if people just believe their efforts make a difference, if enough people believe it, it will multiply whatever they initially believed could be achieved.

All of this may be true, but when election day rolls around, a rational person will not spend his time and money going to a voting booth because his vote will not make one iota of difference in the election results. People come up with all kinds of other reasons why their vote is important, but they are only deluding themselves. The Champagne Sherry principle is the only voting strategy that has merit, and I can prove it.

well, rationally, you could also think like this that there is this tradition, and a lot of people seems to be following it, and I have no obvious reason not to do it besides saving a couple of hours (and human beings aren't especially good at focusing their energy as we waste a lot of it, just look around yourself), so doing it seems to have the possibility of aiding a tradition which makes difference while not doing it saves two hours you would otherwise waste on something else whose gain would very likely not make a difference at all but just continue leaving you in the gutter of life.

The Voice of Time wrote:well, rationally, you could also think like this that there is this tradition, and a lot of people seems to be following it, and I have no obvious reason not to do it besides saving a couple of hours (and human beings aren't especially good at focusing their energy as we waste a lot of it, just look around yourself), so doing it seems to have the possibility of aiding a tradition which makes difference while not doing it saves two hours you would otherwise waste on something else whose gain would very likely not make a difference at all but just continue leaving you in the gutter of life.

One reason for voting is that it makes you feel good, and in this miserable world, anything that makes you feel good has merit. However, voting is far less rational than going to church. At least going to church is like buying a lottery ticket to heaven that nobody can actually prove is a stupid bet. But proof that voting is a stupid bet is available the very next day.

The country is in such dire straits, whoever is chosen, Romney or Obama will not have any impact at all.


I would vote Obama.

reasonvemotion wrote:The country is in such dire straits, whoever is chosen, Romney or Obama will not have any impact at all.


I would vote Obama.

One problem is that the Democrats and Republicans are just branches of the same party: The Big Government Party, where the Democrats lean toward more personal freedom, but less economic freedom; and the Republicans toward more economic freedom, but less personal freedom. The American Energy Party is for limited government that promotes both personal and economic freedom.

What the USA needs is financial healing.


Is there anyone willing to tackle this monumental problem? If so, that is who I would vote for.

America was once a grand country, it is collapsing before our eyes. Can anyone save "her".

reasonvemotion wrote:What the USA needs is financial healing.


Is there anyone willing to tackle this monumental problem? If so, that is who I would vote for.

America was once a grand country, it is collapsing before our eyes. Can anyone save "her".

There is no "grand country" and there has never been one. Only free-market capitalism and personal freedom can provide a reasonable facsimile thereof, and up to now, neither has ever existed.

The American Energy Party is for limited government that promotes both personal and economic freedom.

So Bob, would the above be the one for you?

There is no "grand country" and there has never been one

Bob, I dunno..................you could be wrong.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFV_tmTcU0Q

reasonvemotion wrote:The country is in such dire straits, whoever is chosen, Romney or Obama will not have any impact at all.


I would vote Obama.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMX_B8Iumsg

-Imp

reasonvemotion wrote:

The American Energy Party is for limited government that promotes both personal and economic freedom.

So Bob, would the above be the one for you?

There is no "grand country" and there has never been one

Bob, I dunno..................you could be wrong.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFV_tmTcU0Q

The American Energy Party is the one for me since I am the American Energy Party! And I'll tell you something about the Grand Old Flag. The problem with flags is that there just aren't enough flag burnings in this world. Do you want to join my new organization called Flag Burners International? Every day, we will burn some country's flag, and when we run out of countries, we will start over again. By the way, the flag of the American Energy Party is not exempt from being burned. It is a great white star on a field of red. The star is abstract and off center, with shards of light streaming to the borders. Nice-looking flag for a party that's still in the idea stage, huh?

Sounds impressive Bob.