Democracy: Do we REALLY want it?

[MineralMan]

I wonder about this often. Even in presidential election years, way fewer than half of eligible voters bother to vote. We don't work all that hard to change that dismal turnout. Why?

Do we really trust the people to vote in ways we'd like? I wonder. If we did, would we not be doing everything possible to increase turnout? We're not doing that, generally. We sometimes make half-hearted efforts to get more like-minded voters to the polls, but we do poorly even there.

Are we really interested in measuring the will of the entire population? Do we trust the people to vote wisely? I think this is a worthwhile question and one that deserves discussion and honest thought.

What would happen if 75% of all eligible voters actually voted? 90%? Would we live in a better society if that occurred? Are you sure? Are you willing to work to make that happen?

What say you?

[MineralMan]

1. Oh, well...It seemed like a good question.

Maybe it's too uncomfortable a question to discuss...

[WillyT]

2. I'd Agree... We Need Teach-Ins... TPTB Count On Low Voter Turn-Out, And...

So Does The Donor Class, For The Donor Primaries.

With social media... it should be a lot easier than it has been in the past.

[MineralMan]

3. It should be easier, but we're still not doing it.

When we bother with GOTV, we're often only talking to people on a list of registered voters of our own party. I don't do that. I simply walk my precinct, knocking on doors. I want to talk to everyone I can. We have a higher than average turnout, but I'm just one old guy.

If I post about GOTV, my threads are ignored or even ridiculed. Do we really want people to vote? Are we afraid of their votes? If we are, do we really want democracy at all? It's troubling to think about.

[treestar]

4. I have a bad feeling that if they all voted

the Republicans would win everything.

[MineralMan]

6. Do you?

That's sad. I disagree. I think people would respond fairly and vote well. I think a lot of people feel as you do, though, and are really frightened of actual democratic voting. I find that concept truly alarming. But I think it may be the case. Clearly, I disagree.

[treestar]

12. Well maybe not

the conventional wisdom is that they would vote democratic. But now I wonder. I talk to people who don't vote and they seem so dumb that they would respond to the propaganda money pays for.

I'm not against democracy as you are positing. I figure if someone doesn't vote, they choose not to be part of it. To me this means they are satisfied with the status quo.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. Read post 7, because it is more complicated than just that

and I do speak with people who don't vote like regularly.

And no, they are not satisfied or happy with the status quo, they just do not expect anybody to pay attention to them or their needs. Why? In their living memory none has.

Classic example, schools. Every politician and their sister promises better schools in the inner city. Every politician, or at least the vast majority of them, do not even try to improve the schools of the inner city the second after they are sworn in.

I deal with this regularly And no voting the republicans out and bringing the dems in does not change the equation. And that is just one issue.

[GGJohn]

5. I'm not really sure how to up voter participation.

I never miss an election, I feel it's my civic duty to vote.
Maybe a constitutional amendment mandating voting? Maybe making voting day a national holiday?
Extend to 3 days to vote instead of 1?

[MineralMan]

8. I'm not sure either.

First, though, we'd have to agree that universal voting would be a good idea. I suspect that many do not really think so. I'm not in that group, though.

[GGJohn]

9. I suspect that those that would be opposed would be Republicans,

IMHO, when Democrats come out to vote in large numbers, we win.
Mandatory voting is a tough one to convince the nation of.

[MineralMan]

10. I think you might be surprised, if people actually

spoke the truth about this. I doubt that many will do so, though. Many only really want people who they're sure agree with them to vote, really. More is the pity, I think. That's not really democracy.

[GGJohn]

11. Not me.

I want every eligible citizen to vote, be they Republican, Democrat, Independent, etc.
Let's all vote and let the chips fall where they may, that would be democracy in action.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Nope, we don't

and the people who have not voted in years will tell you, if you are willing to listen, why they don't vote.

it comes down to they do not listen. City Hall does not care (I have heard variations of this often. Usually state capital is not mentioned but DC is). But those are poor people! Yup, and now oligarchy studies prove they are correct.

I vote, but not because my vote matters... because it really does not.

Should this be changed? Yes, but it goes so much more beyond just voting, just voting is a nice fantasy... and when it does... well, will be interesting to watch.

If it helps, the misery loves company part, we are not alone... and others have known this for a while and are willing to die to change their oligarchies into something more representative of their needs. Some of it is good, some of it is really bad... We are far from being there... but...

I know you did not expect a downer, or a serious answer. I promise to do penance for that.

[Jamaal510]

14. I sometimes think about

this country going the route of compulsory voting in order to raise the turnout. I remember Pres. O floating the idea a while back, and one of my classes discussed it a few months ago. So far, I like the idea. I don't see any reason why there shouldn't be CV once we start to make voting more accessible and convenient. The people are the ones who still ultimately affect how the country is ran, plus there will always be a person who gets elected regardless of turnout. Other countries have done CV without much of a problem. It might get people to actually read up more on the issues, too, and convince more politicians to listen to ordinary people. I don't expect Republicans to support the idea (for obvious reasons), and if the Democratic Party were to get serious about it, you already know the GOP would fear-monger about "tyrannical government" or the so-called nanny state. I wonder if CV would be a more popular idea if there are some type of incentives offered for voting.

[sendero]

15. Because most Americans...

... have figured out what a farce it all is? That politicians say one thing and do another OVER and OVER again? That they don't give two shits what the voters think once they have won the election.

Maybe those people are smarter than you.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

16. Democracy is not the same thing as voter turnout.

In a society where most of the voters would be reasonably happy with any of the likely outcomes of an election, turnout may well be low, but that doesn't mean democracy is broken.

If anything, very *high* voter turnout may sometimes be a sign of a crisis, if it's caused by a party a lot of the voters hate getting significant support.

[RiverLover]

17. If we had 75% voter turnout, we'd still have most candidates purchased by Moneyed Interests, &

we'd still have Plutocracy. We are not represented, corporations & billionaires are. Voting won't change that, only changing our corrupt election campaign & lobbying systems can bring back Democracy.

[Bonobo]

18. I say "who's 'we'"? nt