I would say to that person that voting could matter if we passed state level electoral reform. Give them something real and tangible to pursue instead of wasting time and thought on a topic that has no solution.
this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
-5 points (42.4% liked)
Asklemmy
43884 readers
839 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
It mostly makes sense. There are infamous examples of voting being de jure or de facto illegal for groups of people where their suffrage would likely cause significant change. Just look at the USA pre-Civil Rights Act, Rhodesia, Apartheid South Africa, and Israel. I'm sure there are others.
False in theory, true in practice. It is rare for the political landscape and a majority vote to align in such a way that it really has a disruptive effect. And in those instances wherein it happened, wasn't uncommon to see a coup afterwards.
Pretty obviously false, and I'd genuinely question the social and intellectual capabilities of anybody who truly believes this - originally sarcastic - phrase.
i think it's misguided because voting can have an impact; but doesn't since that's the extent of civic engagement for an overwhelming majority of americans which leads to manipulate-able voters who have to use their emotions to decide on things that they know nothing about.
if voting made no difference, then why do they try their hardest to prevent poor people and minorities from voting?
Exactly this.
Indifference is how you know something doesn't matter. I remember this lesson even from game development: People complaining about your game is still alright. When the feedback stops entirely, that's when you fucked up.
What if the feedback stops, but the playrate remains high? (ie., indifference but high voter turnout)
Difficult to say as that's really not a common case at all. Might just lack evidence for how to understand this.
It makes perfect sense coming from you.
If voting wasnโt important than republicans wouldnโt make it so hard to do.