Should voting be mandatory?

Thanks for responding! I agree with your assessment that Republicans gain votes when less people vote. To be honest, I'm tired of the whole "two-party" debate thing. It's just two sides of the coin. In theory, both parties bring something to the table.

We've made politics "entertainment" instead of a "social function". We love to hear stories of how "this governor voted no on legislation CYX even though he was paid by company ABC to do so". That's a sad case.

In short, our media (and attention spans) focus on the negative.

We also "straitjacket" people into political parties. Political parties have now become more about "keeping up the appearances of what a Democrat or Republican should do, than what it the right thing to do. Because a person is Republican, they may feel reluctant to vote for that bill. Because a person is Democrat, they may feel reluctant for that bill.

Isn't the point to make a decision based on what the person thinks is right?

As far as your third party comment, I agree with you. I am doubtful, however, about the rise of a third party because of inertia. The longer an institution remains (in this case, a political party) remains, the more power it has to maintain the status quo. This doesn't mean that things can't change. It does mean that it will take a lot to change it!
I have a slightly more optimistic view of third parties....as I am a member of one...though one that has lost a lot of the power we once had years ago. We have had a Gov. and a US Senator ( though that last one was not for long) If anything, there is a better chance today then years ago...for a stand alone candidate at least...maybe not a party...due to social media. Also Bernie Sanders is basically a third party candidate in the democratic race.
 
Werbung:
I have a slightly more optimistic view of third parties....as I am a member of one...though one that has lost a lot of the power we once had years ago. We have had a Gov. and a US Senator ( though that last one was not for long) If anything, there is a better chance today then years ago...for a stand alone candidate at least...maybe not a party...due to social media. Also Bernie Sanders is basically a third party candidate in the democratic race.

Rand Paul is basically a third party candidate under the Republican banner as was his father. I believe that the only way for a third party to truly become viable is to start from the ground up. People aren't going to "waste a vote" on a party, or candidate, that they don't think can win. If third parties had more seats in lower offices and became more "mainstream" or recognized, they could become contenders. Until then, the better candidates will still have to run under the R or D, in my opinion.
 
The GOP has spent the last 20 years making it harder and harder for the typical democrat demographics to vote, (poor, blacks, women, people who have souls, etc). To make it mandatory would undo all their hard work.
 
Rand Paul is basically a third party candidate under the Republican banner as was his father. I believe that the only way for a third party to truly become viable is to start from the ground up. People aren't going to "waste a vote" on a party, or candidate, that they don't think can win. If third parties had more seats in lower offices and became more "mainstream" or recognized, they could become contenders. Until then, the better candidates will still have to run under the R or D, in my opinion.
I don't care who gets either ticket, I'm not voting for any of them. If I vote its going to be for Carly, or not at all. I'll never vote for a professional politician, liar, spin doctor again... No matter what party and I don't believe I'm the only one who feels this way. More and more people are getting tired of this. I think if a 3rd party could get their name out there they'll have a better chance of winning than they ever have before. If they don't win, I bet they'll get enough of the votes to qualify for government funding in the next election.

If it has to be somebody under the rep and dem titles, at least we do have some "outside the party box" candidates like Rand and Bernie.
 
Rand Paul is basically a third party candidate under the Republican banner as was his father. I believe that the only way for a third party to truly become viable is to start from the ground up. People aren't going to "waste a vote" on a party, or candidate, that they don't think can win. If third parties had more seats in lower offices and became more "mainstream" or recognized, they could become contenders. Until then, the better candidates will still have to run under the R or D, in my opinion.
Ron Paul was yes, Rand Paul is not, he just likes to ride that train that people think he is Ron Paul...he is not. He is a can't hold a steady position, inexperienced version of his dad. Rand Has no Business in this race...maybe in time, but not right now.
 
I don't care who gets either ticket, I'm not voting for any of them. If I vote its going to be for Carly, or not at all. I'll never vote for a professional politician, liar, spin doctor again... No matter what party and I don't believe I'm the only one who feels this way. More and more people are getting tired of this. I think if a 3rd party could get their name out there they'll have a better chance of winning than they ever have before. If they don't win, I bet they'll get enough of the votes to qualify for government funding in the next election.

If it has to be somebody under the rep and dem titles, at least we do have some "outside the party box" candidates like Rand and Bernie.

what makes you think being a CEO is any different then a politician...outside they get paid a lot more and have less accountability.
 
I don't care who gets either ticket, I'm not voting for any of them. If I vote its going to be for Carly, or not at all. I'll never vote for a professional politician, liar, spin doctor again... No matter what party and I don't believe I'm the only one who feels this way. More and more people are getting tired of this. I think if a 3rd party could get their name out there they'll have a better chance of winning than they ever have before. If they don't win, I bet they'll get enough of the votes to qualify for government funding in the next election.

If it has to be somebody under the rep and dem titles, at least we do have some "outside the party box" candidates like Rand and Bernie.

I can agree that people are growing tired, but I don't think we're to the point yet where a third party can do much "damage." I don't think they'll get as many votes as you might think... yet. People have been swearing that they will for the past several elections, but it hasn't happened. I think "ground up" is the only way, and that takes time.
 
what makes you think being a CEO is any different then a politician...outside they get paid a lot more and have less accountability.
At this point I'm so disgruntled and cynical that a i decided a CEO can't be worse than a politician. She may be just as bad, of course, but I'll take the chance. I would vote for snoopy before I would a politician. My vote may be wasted, but when our country is going to hell in a flaming, stinky handbasket, at least I'll know I did what I could.
 
At this point I'm so disgruntled and cynical that a i decided a CEO can't be worse than a politician. She may be just as bad, of course, but I'll take the chance. I would vote for snoopy before I would a politician. My vote may be wasted, but when our country is going to hell in a flaming, stinky handbasket, at least I'll know I did what I could.
you know that as soon as she started running...she is a politicain ...even snoopy would be. And as hard as it can be to belive, alot of politicans are actuly good and try hard....the system itself forces compromises that we don't and they don't like though as well.
 
The GOP has spent the last 20 years making it harder and harder for the typical democrat demographics to vote, (poor, blacks, women, people who have souls, etc). To make it mandatory would undo all their hard work.

You want to back this claim up with some data?
 
Voter ID laws, courts having to step in when Republicans redrew the lines...when Republicans gained house seats...Democrats actually got more votes overall..overall the democrats have to get like 1.2 to 1.4 move voters overall to win. possibly due to how lines where drawn..
 
You want to back this claim up with some data?
"All told, a dozen states have approved new obstacles to voting. Kansas and Alabama now require would-be voters to provide proof of citizenship before registering. Florida and Texas made it harder for groups like the League of Women Voters to register new voters. Maine repealed Election Day voter registration, which had been on the books since 1973. Five states – Florida, Georgia, Ohio, Tennessee and West Virginia – cut short their early voting periods. Florida and Iowa barred all ex-felons from the polls, disenfranchising thousands of previously eligible voters. And six states controlled by Republican governors and legislatures – Alabama, Kansas, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin – will require voters to produce a government-issued ID before casting ballots. More than 10 percent of U.S. citizens lack such identification, and the numbers are even higher among constituencies that traditionally lean Democratic – including 18 percent of young voters and 25 percent of African-Americans."

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-gop-war-on-voting-20110830#ixzz3c9JGRkBt
 
you know that as soon as she started running...she is a politicain ...even snoopy would be. And as hard as it can be to belive, alot of politicans are actuly good and try hard....the system itself forces compromises that we don't and they don't like though as well.
I can't believe you took it there with snoopy! In some circles, those are fighting' words! Lol

you know the movies where the young teacher goes to work in a poor, inner city school? She is hopeful and full of ideas, while all the seasoned teachers are bitter and have basically given up on life all together? That's kindof how I see Carly. Well, except I'm sure she isn't niave and full of hope and good intentions. As a matter of fact, she strikes me as one of those women who would pee standing up just to prove she's as good as any man. But maybe she hasnt been taught the ins and outs of the crooked, 'bribe a politician' game.
 
I think I have a handle on all of this..

It’s Simple really..

Stay with me here..

The way I see it,

The folks who are getting free stuff, Don’t like the folks who are paying for the free stuff,Because the folks who are paying for the free stuff, Can no longer afford to pay for both the free stuff and their own stuff.

And, The folks who are paying for the free stuff, Want the free stuff to stop.
And the folks who are getting the free stuff, Want even MORE free stuff on top of the free stuff they’re getting already!

Now….. The people who are forcing people to PAY for the free stuff, Have told the people who are receiving the free stuff, That the people who are PAYING for the free stuff, Are being mean, prejudiced and racist.

So …. the people who are GETTING the free stuff, Have been convinced they need to HATE the people who are PAYING for the free stuff because they are selfish.

And they are promised more free stuff if they will vote for the people who force the people who pay for the free stuff to give them even more free stuff.

And ……. that’s the Straight Stuff

Just sayin
 
Werbung:
I think I have a handle on all of this..

It’s Simple really..

Stay with me here..

The way I see it,

The folks who are getting free stuff, Don’t like the folks who are paying for the free stuff,Because the folks who are paying for the free stuff, Can no longer afford to pay for both the free stuff and their own stuff.

And, The folks who are paying for the free stuff, Want the free stuff to stop.
And the folks who are getting the free stuff, Want even MORE free stuff on top of the free stuff they’re getting already!

Now….. The people who are forcing people to PAY for the free stuff, Have told the people who are receiving the free stuff, That the people who are PAYING for the free stuff, Are being mean, prejudiced and racist.

So …. the people who are GETTING the free stuff, Have been convinced they need to HATE the people who are PAYING for the free stuff because they are selfish.

And they are promised more free stuff if they will vote for the people who force the people who pay for the free stuff to give them even more free stuff.

And ……. that’s the Straight Stuff

Just sayin
For a moment I thought you were talking about human beings. But then I realized that post couldn't be that cold and callous. And it hit me! The post is obviously talking about corporate welfare that billions and billions of our tax dollars go towards. The post knows, I bet, that its posts like this one and so many more that's paying the billions because the corporations are paying less taxes than anybody. I feel kind of bad for judging the post based on a false assumption that the post wants to live in a world where the poor people are forced to starve to death (since growing or killing food to feed your family is illegal in a lot of places.), and the extremely greedy and rich corporations got everybodies tax money because some silly post thinks helping people live is worse than CEOs of corporations needed the $12,000,000 Christmas bonus

This is a prime example of why conservatives are liked a whole lot less than a cockroach. When the blind allow evil to take them by the hand and lead them into a world where people who need help buying FOOD are evil and bums. Yet billionaires who want everyone else to pay taxes while they get millions in corporate welfare and don't pay any taxes. And people go for it!!! What am I missing? How did our country turn into this? Real people mean less to half the population than a terrible corporate leach with a head at both ends? And all I can think about is all the ways these corporations are going to bite each and everyone of those lost, blind souls right on the buttocks.
 
Back
Top