Compulsory voting is a good thing.

More did.

 

Possible correlation/causation fallacy here. Explain how you know you got this material such as it could only be from your registration information being given out? Was there anything that specifically targeted you as a particular party? How are you distinguishing this material from mass mailings that are not based upon voter registrations?

 

The point is that people refused to participate in a corrupt system, and their non-vote is as good an expression of political interest as a vote.

If voter turnout in the USA was exceptionally low (say 6,000 voters out of maybe 150 million eligible voters) then the discontent would manifest itself in other areas, and in much more vehement manner than simply not voting. The winner of that 6,000 vote election would have no support at all, and I suspect there would be so much civil unrest that the entire process of governing would have to be re-evaluated.

The USA is not far from that point right now.

 

A voters political party affiliation through voter registration is public information. The parties would have had to get this info from my registration as I'm not active in the party politics other than that. My daughter is apolitical and doesn't register to vote and receives zilch. I imagine some is mass mailing but the bulk is from my registration. The Republicans were the only party to actually call me personally as I'm a registered Republican, so do the math.

http://www.publicrecords360.com/voting-records
"Citizen voter registration records are typically maintained through the department of licensing at the county or state level, and are subject to a certain amount of restriction. However, items such as poll books, precinct lists, and other current lists of registered voters are considered public record and may be available for public inspection or copying, though this can vary by state. Specific information on how an individual citizen voted in any election is not publicly available, though you can find out if a specific individual voted in a particular election".

 

I got calls from both parties and I am registered as Libertarian Party. I just wanted to know how you came to the conclusion that such attentions were from your registration information. Looks like you are just making an educated guess. And by that I a man not saying you are wrong per se, simply you don't have enough info to be sure, but are guessing the odds.

 

Compelling people to do that which is voluntary will never work. Why do yo think that people speed, drive drunk, drive while under the influence of other mind altering substances? It is because most people are rebellious and the majority of the time when you demand that a person should do something, they will only comply when being watched. Are you asking for a more totalitarian system of governance than what is already in being implemented?

 

I suppose you're right that I made a guess but with the evidence I provided ie, registration is public info and with no other affiliation on record and my kid receiving no contact it's an educated guess. I might add you being registered Libertarian receiving calls from both parties makes sense since you could vote either way, up for grabs I suspect. But you bring up a valid reason for me to ask the Republicans how they targeted my vote and where they got my info.

 

And just whom keeps paying for all these elections? What if one the second round the proportion of informal votes (an oxymoron pro se) doubled? If it got above 50% would all the crooks quit and go home?

 

The apathetic have chosen to be disenfranchised. Should they want to, they can vote.

 

I have never liked Donald Trump, not in the past nor the present and in all possibility the future. He is just another elitist born on third base declaring he hit a triple. But I do admire that he wasn't a member of the club so he has raided the club. What you tire of I find not only amusing but productive. He has called more attention to the sad state of this nation and caused more to question the values of our so called government and for that I commend him. In that same realm, I have to give him credit for how he plays the game. To date he has accomplished much by letting things hand themselves by their own brash stupidity. In fact I believe a large part of those closest to him will be bashed upon the rocks of a turbulent sea and they will take many of the problems with them.

Otherwise I am sad that he won, I would have rather Hitlerly would have ascended to the pinnacle of corruption. By now she would have started the correction this world so desperately needs. The only thing that would make me doubt this path would be the level of destruction she may have unleashed. Trump and his war mongering is bad enough.

With that said, it leads to the question, what does voting accomplish? My principle is why vote, it only encourages them. What if everybody refused to recognize any other as superior and an authority over them?

 

But what good does it do them when they still accept another as their superior and authority over them. Does it do one any good to refuse to choose a new slave master but still bow to their commands.

No where in the constitution does it give government any authority over the people and just to be sure it was understood, it was reiterated in the bill of rights.

 

Slavery by any other name is still slavery. Theft by any other definition is still theft.

 

Then what? I can't say I hate the idea, but we live in a Constitutional Republic, and there is no Constitutional provision for "none of the above". No revotes. No do-overs. No barring candidates from running.

 

Or maybe, just maybe, since we require voters to be actual citizens, but we do not require them to PROVE they are actual citizens when they register, people who have done wrong, and know it, are trying to cover their asses. Nah, couldn't be that, could it?

 

Which electoral college, original or hijacked?

 

What could ever be at stake that would condone picking a master?

 

Voting is a privilege not a right, just ask those that are felons for smoking the wrong weed. Also, if it is a right, then why does one need to be qualified? If it were a right, why can't one just show up to vote and be marked with a indelible ink that takes some time to wear off?

 

How do you suppose that voters were vetted in the days before the Internet, computers, and other mass communications / record keeping?

 

I would say that would be a peaceful revolt and we have a new start without rulers.

 

Great way to put it but a little clarification on my part, they do ask for proof you are a citizen. You know that little check box where the qualified voter declares they are subjects, subject to Amendment 14.

 

Vetting, their was no vetting. Record keeping, so I would guess the bible wouldn't be record keeping. It seems that the oldest surviving written treaty dates back to 1269 BC and then there are the pyramid text that date back to 2613-2181BCE.

And I guess by your insinuation that this was a nation of idiots even thought at the time of the Declaration of Independence, Harvard was 300 years old.

 

OMG. Not bad enough you troll me everywhere else, are we going to derail this thread too?

How in the HELL did you come to ANY of those conclusions based upon what I just said? This should be good, ladies and gentlemen. You have carte blanche from the top to insult me any way you like. Go.

 

How do you suppose that voters were vetted in the days before the Internet, computers, and other mass communications / record keeping?

Still having to repost to avoid being trolled.

 

You have a point but I would refuse to vote on principle.I'm a cantankerous old fart and would refuse to pay the fine.A few weeks in jail is no real hardship.

 

Didn't know there was a choice.