If You Are Waiting To Get Excited To Vote YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT.

[TheMastersNemesis]

I get tired of hearing he MSM and press talking about democrats or others NOT being excited to vote in the next election. Such claims implies that one MUST have an exciting charismatic "savior" candidate to vote for. What bullshit. Every election and every race or very few races are going to have earth shaking "orgasmic" candidates.

Sure you want and enticing candidate who stirs you. It is very Madison Avenue. The problem is that throughout our history we have had a small minority of great presidents or other politicians. History is not that generous. We have had some good presidents, senators, representatives, mayors et al who were somewhat ordinary, but were great at running government.

As a voter you are trying to elect the best person on the ballot who can do the job in at least an adequate way. You are trying to get the best candidate available. And voting is important for no other reason.

So if you are waiting for the candidate that gives you some sort of orgasm or you won't vote then you are really being stupid. Also REMEMBER SOME OF THE MOST CHARISMATIC LEADERS IN HISTORY WERE DEMONS. We had leaders able to stir people up like Hitler, Mussolini, Napoleon, Ghengus Kahn, et al who were absolute disasters to their followers and others.

[Petrushka]

1. --->

[lovemydog]

2. I agree.

I'm actually excited by good policy, whether it's from someone charismatic or not. Locally especially, I've seen tremendous positives in my area by an active engaged citizenry that helps elect genuinely liberal candidates. Just one example - leftists who oppose greedy corporate speculators in order to preserve beautiful historic neighborhoods, while at the same time providing much better low income housing. If that doesn't get one excited about voting, then I don't know what will. There's hundreds of good reasons to vote in every single election for the most progressive available candidate on every ballot. At every level including the presidency.

[murielm99]

3. I think the MSM is trying to create a narrative.

Most people are not excited about voting yet. They do not start paying attention to voting this early in the election cycle. They get sick of all the hype and tune out. Many, many people do not vote in local elections. Even in Presidential years, many people skip voting in the primaries.

I do think that not everything needs to be exciting every minute of the day. My Senator, Dick Durbin, is not exciting, but he is damn good at his job.

[TheMastersNemesis]

5. The Need To Be Titillated & Excited Is the Problem.

We have a national mind set about being excited and titillated over just about anything. Unless you are wildly excited most of the time there is no value. We have a population that is addicted to being excited. Otherwise there is apathy. Life is not just about being in a orgasmic state all the time. A lot of time who you vote for has to come down to what they would do in office not just their personal appeal. The worst leaders and best con men and women and even serial killers like Bundy had a lot of charm and even charisma and excited people.

Some of the best leaders were did not have "rock star" attractiveness. They were at time ordinary and talent people who could get things done. Our personality cult elections and who you would have a beer with is insane.

[The2ndWheel]

4. Some of the ordinary people who were great at running government were demons

The system is so huge, that no single vote really matters. People end up needing something to vote for because of that, not just because it's your civic duty. Plus how can one person represent thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions, or hundreds of millions of people at one time? They can't. It's tough to represent one other person. It's all a show.

Some people are excited by the process, some people need something more to get involved in the process.

[jeff47]

6. Browbeating is totally the way to deal with this problem. (nt)

[Blue_Tires]

7. Better you than me to say this

I always get a shitstorm for daring to bring this point up, so I don't even bother anymore...

[hfojvt]

8. Napoleon does not belong in a list with Hitler

He was actually quite progressive. In some ways it's too bad he could not have won the war of 1812 and created an EU. Might have thereby avoided WWI and WWII.