To tell you the truth I have an issue with politics. I can't seem to find a way to trust any government. I see them all as car salesmen. Really!

Does it make a difference if we vote?

I don't have statistics on hand but I think (could be wrong) that half of the country doesn't vote. I am starting to see why because maybe they have the same dilemma as me...TRUST!

Is it but an Utopian theory to have a honest Congress that doesn't get catered by corporate lobbyists, truly helps the country progress, and caters to those in need. Is this (or has been always) a far fletched idealogy in society as a whole?

So what is your opinion on the next vote. Is it important for you to vote or not? Do you think it makes a difference for our country or do you think the country moves its direction regardless of a vote or not.

Yes....remember Bush vs Gore in Florida? Just a handful of votes..............

I think some things are harder to see because the effect is not IMMEDIATELY visible or easily linked to the action

but I think of voting as very important because too many people died for me to be able to do it.. I cant help those who dont choose to vote, but I also feel they have much LESS to say about what happens in the country when they wont even bother to 'try' to be heard that one day out of the year

I used to think it was no big deal if I littered (when I was a kid) until my mom explained that although my little bit of trash may seem insignificant, once it was added to everyone elses little bits it became quite impactful

I feel the same about voting, mine is just one voice, but you build a choir with a whole lot of 'one voice's...lol

in other words, to me, yes voting does matter

ah, the hanging chads b.s.
not to mention the electoral vote is the only
thing that elects a president, not popular vote
as the way it should be.
your state, county and city votes do count.

Yes it is important to vote.You can't complain.if you don't vote because Your not trying to change anything. If you don't. All I see is a complainer then.Yes if we don't like a member of congress, If we don't like what they stand for or how they vote on issues. WE can vote them out the next time. This is how we will get the people in office that we are looking for.Don't give them a second chance. Do it right the first time or get out.

Voting is a waste of time in general. The big political parties are owned by the same people. The differences are only illusory.

I like George Carlin's classic response to the "if you don't vote, you have no right to complain" argument. He said that you (the voter) are responsible for putting the scumbags in office, and the responsibility for dealing with the consequences falls squarely on you. (he was quite a bit more "colorful", but you get the idea)
Here's the whole thing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk

I am clear as crystal about this. I am voting for Ron Paul no matter what! it is MY way of showing disgust with both parties who are ruining our nation!

But electoral college votes, not people votes. Thus if you are a reb in a blue state or vice versa you vote is pretty meaningless.

Whichever party slate wins the most popular votes in the State becomes that State's Electors-so that, in effect, whichever presidential ticket gets the most popular votes in a State wins all the Electors of that State. [The two exceptions to this are Maine and Nebraska where two Electors are chosen by statewide popular vote and the remainder by the popular vote within each Congressional district].


http://www.nationalatlas.gov/articles/government/a_electoralC.html

What makes you think I don't know this?

you are not the only one who is reading this

it reflects the role the popular.people vote has in the electoral process

So why are you quoting me?

for those considering that their vote may be 'meaningless'

That doesn't change my statement. I gave a conditions of you are opposite side of a heavily colored state. A Republican in NY or CA has a pretty meaningless vote in the current system. Drop the electoral college, it is no longer needed.

things change, but votes arent 'meaningless'

they are either the popular vote or they arent, but the vote themselves have to be made in order to determine that,,,,

Yes, every vote counts.....Everyone who is eligible to vote should vote...Before they vote, they should understand they are 'obligated' to learn as much as possible about the candidates....I don't think the country moves in its' own direction, but I do think voting party lines is a mistake....Vote the person based on your confidence in them doing what is best for your country as a whole....

the only difference your vote makes is when you vote responsibly

dont vote because so n so is the lesser of two evils

i cant remember the last time only two candidates were on the ballot for president

if both are evil then vote for someone else

educate yourself about the other candidates
maybe they wont win(probably wont)
but if it starts happening enough maybe the two evils will
quit being evil in the future

or better yet maybe the two largest terrorist groups doing the most harm to the constitution will cease to exist (republican and democrat parties)

so yes your vote can make a difference if you use it to make a difference


just a thought

but hey

what do i know

good advice

I have taken it since I started voting at 18

only your local votes count

if you think you vote in a good or bad president

your out of your mind

thats why you only have two choices

these people are raised from birth

to be your leaders

and they are psychopaths

if its so fair

why do the idiots keep picking

people from secret societys

like skull and bones

you only have the illusion of voting

miss america you have 50+

people to choose from

president 2

you live in a republic

not a democracy


remember

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,

and to the republic for which it stands


no democracy there

you are still ruled by the king and queen

wake up

You wake up....

re·pub·lic   [ri-puhb-lik] Show IPA
noun
1.
a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.
2.
any body of persons viewed as a commonwealth.
3.
a state in which the head of government is not a monarch or other hereditary head of state.

From Wiki....

A republic is a form of government in which the state is considered a "public matter" (Latin: res publica), not the private concern or property of the head of state. In modern times, a common simplified definition of a republic is a government where the head of state is not a monarch.[1][2]

United States
Main article: Republicanism in the United States
A distinct set of definitions for the word republic evolved in the United States. In common parlance a republic is a state that does not practice direct democracy but rather has a government indirectly controlled by the people. This understanding of the term was originally developed by James Madison, and notably employed in Federalist Paper No. 10. This meaning was widely adopted early in the history of the United States, including in Noah Webster's dictionary of 1828. It was a novel meaning to the term; representative democracy was not an idea mentioned by Machiavelli and did not exist in the classical republics.[52]
The term republic does not appear in the Declaration of Independence, but does appear in Article IV of the Constitution which "guarantee[s] to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government." What exactly the writers of the constitution felt this should mean is uncertain. The Supreme Court, in Luther v. Borden (1849), declared that the definition of republic was a "political question" in which it would not intervene. In two later cases, it did establish a basic definition. In United States v. Cruikshank (1875), the court ruled that the "equal rights of citizens" were inherent to the idea of a republic.
However, the term republic is not synonymous with the republican form. The republican form is defined as one in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whom those powers are specially delegated. In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627. [53]
Beyond these basic definitions the word republic has a number of other connotations. W. Paul Adams observes that republic is most often used in the United States as a synonym for state or government, but with more positive connotations than either of those terms.[54] Republicanism is often referred to as the founding ideology of the United States. Traditionally scholars believed this American republicanism was a derivation of the liberal ideologies of John Locke and others developed in Europe.
A political philosophy of republicanism that formed during the Renaissance period, and initiated by Machiavelli, was thought to have had little impact on the founders of the United States. In the 1960s and 1970s a revisionist school[citation needed] led by the likes of Bernard Bailyn began to argue that republicanism was just as or even more important than liberalism in the creation of the United States.[55] This issue is still much disputed and scholars like Isaac Kramnick completely reject this view.[56]