Is An Uninformed Vote Better Than No Vote?

ras_b asks: "I don't pay attention to politics at all, and so I will not be voting in today's elections. My family has been telling me that this is a mistake and I should vote anyway, partly because I have slightly conservative views which agrees with their political outlook. My reasoning is that since I am totally uninformed, I shouldn't vote. I don't want to vote Republican or Democrat, only to find out later I totally disagree with something a candidate stands for. So, here's my dilemma and my question: Is an uninformed vote better than no vote?" This issue is touched upon in a posting by Ezra Klein, of the The American Prospect, who disagrees, arguing against a similar assertion by Greg Mankiw, from a suppressed Fortune article. Greg says: "Sometimes...the most responsible thing a person can do on election day is stay at home ... If you really don't know enough to cast an intelligent vote, you should be eager to let your more informed neighbors make the decision." What do you think?

Comments

You lazy sack of SHIT!

[Overzeetop]

Part of being a citizen of the United States is the responsibility to inform yourself about the issues which govern the country. That means reading the ballot measures and reading at least the basic stances of the candidates on the issues. It's not that hard - most towns have a local paper with a pull-out section a couple days before the election with information on who's running. You posted to /., so I assume you're talented enough to use the internet to look up the candidates in the race if you should need more information.

Part of enjoying the status of being in a free state (and all you libertarians can put quotes around free) is taking the responsibility to vote.

Well, then again, you sound like a troll. *shrug*

OK, But...

[Greyfox]

You don't get to complain about anything political later on. I'm seriously here, you don't vote, you give up your right to complain.

Anyway, how informed do you really have to be? You could just have an opinion -- "The current guys are doing a shitty job! I'm voting them all out!" or "The current guys are doing a great job! I'll vote to keep them!" If you can manage to have that much of an opinion then you should be able to get motivated enough to go do something about it.

By not voting you're just giving my vote that much more weight, and I advocate bringing back impaling and banning all organized religion except for a mandatory state-sponsored one involving Smurfs. But remember, you don't get to complain!

Re:Get Informed

[pete-classic]

Good for you! I think Penn Jillette makes this point very well in "Sock".

-Peter

you shouldnt be uninformed to begin with

[skam240]

This person shouldnt be uninformed to begin with.

seriously.

it's not very hard to go online and get a enough information to form some sort of opinion (however basic it might be) on the candidates running and the initiatives on the ballot (if you live in one of those states).

i am literally disgusted by people who dont vote because they don't know about the issues. it's a nights worth of reading once a year to help make your country a better place. it's your civic duty and the very least you can do for your country.

Re:Let me answer your question with this statement

[wass]

Bzzt, sorry, by not voting you're JUST AS GUILTY of any wars the elected government initiates as if you did vote because YOU DID NOT DO YOUR CIVIC DUTY by voting. Take some responsibility for your life, man.

Re:If you hate the system, vote for the 2nd place.

[fyngyrz]

...well then shut the fuck up, I don't want to hear your whining.

<sarcasm>I'm sorry, I must have missed that modification to the first amendment where what you want gets you the privilege to muzzle others. Good thing for everyone else that you keep up with those sub-rosa changes to the constitution no one else knows about, eh?</sarcasm>

"Statistical basis", my aching ear. You're just another sycophant with a mouthful of high-syllable excuses for pretending voting has an effect. There is no "instability", the parties are the same. Didn't you hear the democrats last night, babbling about 9/11 and "security"? Didn't you hear them talking about a "new direction" in Iraq? Not restoration of rights, not repeal of any of these bullshit laws, nothing about Bush's signing statements, nothing about torture, nothing about the (barely) 3-day congressional workweek and the blatant corporate funds driven legislation mechanism, nothing about all the illegal wiretapping, nothing about funneling billions of dollars to Haliburton et al without so much as a single competitive bid, not a word about habeas corpus, nothing about pulling out troops — it's business as usual in Washington, and you can count on it. I don't need to explain it; I'll just watch it happen, like it always does.

Vote for whoever you want. It's an exercise that does nothing but make you think you did something, while diluting the effect to as near zero as they can possibly keep it. And that's pretty near zero. That's the point of the party system that exists today; if the voters knock one politician down, another one with the same essential set of goals and pushed buttons pops up to replace them, and the system trundles on with no effect on direction, goals, or procedure. You're supposed to be doing this. It keeps the citizens from picking up weapons, but it does not engender the changes they want.