My error went the other way, I voted for Gore in the first election, me still being a Democrat and all, then I voted for Bush due to my deep rooted hatred of Hanoijohn Kerry. This election I Am not inclined to party vote but to vote for the person. So far Rudi Most closely represents what I think.

Voting does work, but most people have forgotten that it is the state and local government where most change can occur... the federal government was never meant to be the babysitter, problem solver and wetnurse to each and every person in the country.

here is what you do.


go and tell all your friends that they are ------(fill in the blank) if they don't go and register.

then tell them they are ----------(fill in the blank) if they don't vote.

if they don't know where to go to register tell them to go to the dmv(or whatever they call the driver license office in your state)

if any of them can't drive for whatever reason offer to take them.

oh and by the way if you don't regester your all chumps. and if you don't go and vote your voting for gene.

It's so great that less then half of the people eligible bother voting. Those who don't are ridiculed by those that do, because they gave up their power to vote when really all they wanted to do was rid themselves of the b.s. war that goes on between the game of politics.

Bravo. I refuse to vote - so dl can ridicule me all he likes, but the vote isn't for the best person anymore - it's for either the guy this camp chooses or the guy that camp chooses, and I don't see all that much difference between them. Oh yeah...I hear a difference in what they SAY...but I never see any actions that back it up. I wish you could fire a president for backing out on a campaign promise. Then I might vote. I'd know that whoever I voted for would be held accountable to do what (s)he said (s)he was going to do, and to NOT do what (s)he said (s)he was NOT going to do. I am STILL the net, and will remain so until things are different.

Now thats just blackmail   

Meet a chump, I will only vote for a person if I believe they can represent my views, or at the very least the Party they represent will curb the loonies getting a free ride on the back of Party Agendas. The latter is as far as I will go in the circular 'must vote' debates. I will not cast a vote on the basis of the best one there, just because they are there - to me thats a wasted vote, and encourages idiots and quasi parties with no basis in their offered Policies.

However, at the end of the day, its a good thing we have a voting system, thats the key factor, and for that we should give a prayer of thanks. Against the latter, whichever is the right principle - mandatory vote or not - becomes which "shade of grey". A welcome luxury that we are fortunate to be able to debate. Many on this Planet still cant vote at all.

Thats certainly true, if more people expressed their views Publicy via whatever medium outside the voting system, Politicians might listen more

(well they might ...... wouldnt they?   )

I don't think voting is a luxury. I think it's a necessity. Those who would elevate certain people to posistions of power should have and demand the right to vote them both in and out of that power.

Just because some people have not fought for that right, from those who would deny it, or earned it, by helping to create or maintain a society who would utilize it, doesn't mean it is not a right.

Luxuries are things which are given or created as gifts and non-essentials. Voting is essential for democratic people. It is essential to any people who have discovered it's power and freedom creating nature. The power of the vote, introduced to people who have a choice, and choose to exercise it, is what history has demonstrated in the past, to be what dictators and those who would deny people of their right, to be dangerous as well as very necessary.

Let me clarify that. It is not the voting which is not working for us. It is the system that the politicians we have voted for, the parties which we have supported, "one versus the other", the system they have created, that is not working. This system that allows the "team-players" to conspire between the "two parties and only two parties", to load up the bills with unnecessary pork spending at the expense of sending that money back down to the tax payers, or into projects necessary to the maintenance and bettering of our society. Irresponsible spending traps money better spend on necessary projects on pork or tax returns.

Campaigning for longer and longer stretches, starting earlier and earlier, spending a new record with each election, at the expense instead of voting on spending, working together longer to reach important compromises; Deciding together rather than at the expense of one party for political leverage, on how best to spend scarce resources is the job of these men and women. But once inducted into the party system, the effort is on remaining electable, for the next election, passing the laws and bills that bring the best chance of positive feelings about candidates rather then taking care of needs.

It is this system that has been created by those already elected that is not working. Term limits that exists for new elected officials but not those already in office.

It is the system which is corrupted and fails us. Not the idea of voting our conscience or minds. Voting into office elected officials which say one thing and do another damages us all but it is the system that is corrupt not the people electing these officials.

I guess your solution of voting "them out" would make sense if we were not dealing with a system "controlled" by two parties who work together to kick down independents on the national level.

If you are an outsider, they both attack you, beyond that, the two parties have their spin masters who pollute any word of mouth you might get as an independent with "spin" most of it bullshit and all of it negative.

Beyond that they work to keep you off the ballot so people either cannot or believe they cannot vote for you. Most independent candidates never break the double digit support rate in national polls. Certainly there are exceptions, Ross Perot, but usually they are rich as well.

Even if you are an independent, or a good natured R or D, the problem is they all make this sacrifice of integrity for electability.