Is Voting the New "Fad"?Follow

Voting is a very important duty of every American citizen. It is their voice to be heard in an otherwise crowded and culturally diverse nation. I learned about how important that it was when I was in 5th grade, and the 1992 presidental election was upon us. We had a whole school vote with all of the students, and were very serious about it down to the last of the ballots counted. This importance has stayed with me, and made me get out and register on my 18th birthday.

A couple of weeks ago, I was flipping through the channels on a rainy day and came across the advertisement for this year's MTV Voting Registration Campaign. Now, I don't agree with MTV at all on anything that they represent musically, but you will have to read my aversions to them in another thread in the future. Fully knowing that it is this channel and the E! Entertainment Channel that pretty much sets all of the current and hip things to do for the week, I immediately took offense. My initial thought was, how dare they stake claim to all of a sudden saying that voting is now the "cool and hip" thing to do, when it has been important ever since the foundation of the country?

After some thinking, I determined that the long-term goal was noble enough. If MTV really is using its popularity to emphasize the importance of the inclusion of every willing and able voting American citizen to get out there and voice their opinion, then more power to them. However, it seems that more and more people have taken it upon themselves to self-proclaim themself as a deliverer of the ignorant and unmotivated. Oprah Winfrey is going to have a Voting Party episode on Sept. 30th, bringing all sorts of celebrities on to "plead and appeal to the nonvoting/nonregistered".

Now for all of you. Does anyone see anything wrong with this? Do the ends justify the means? What happens when celebrities voice their powerful and admired opinion about who they are voting for, and the uneducated vote along with them because it is "cool"? They do offer candidate information on their site and a direct link to register; they are very serious about their campaign, but are they underestimating their audience?

Personally, I prefer to have people learn anyway that they can. I don't think that those that are 18+ are really "programmed" into thinking that they should vote for someone because somebody famous is. As for using fame to usher in priority and responsibility, I think it is one of the best things to come out of it. In my opinion, the only vote that is wasted is the one that is not made.

Edited, Wed Sep 29 22:46:36 2004 by Kelvhand

ssshhhhh dont tell him that. he just got a TV. let the man have his fun.

This will be the second election that I am voting in. I have noticed it before, but whether or not I did has nothing to do with what I just posted. It just never seemed to generate such a larger response in other people (Christina Aguilera, Drew Barrymore, etc.) It seems to be directly correlated.

You didn't answer the question I posed.



From your words it seems like you have an opinion on it, I am curious to hear it.

No, Kelvy, it is the purview of the Democratic Party to attempt to recruit voters historically likely to vote for their party under the guise of "Rock the Vote" or "Get Out the Vote" and other recruiting drives aimed at lower income neighborhoods and particular minorities. Notice that there is never a drive to go into middle class or upper class neighborhoods and ask them if they are registered.

The assumption is that the poor can't motivate themselves to go to the post office or the doors of WalMart and sign a voter registration log, so they must be waited on hand and foot.

Fortunately, these same people are too hungover from the previous evening's crack and MD 20/20 party to actually go out and participate in the election process, thus assuring the country's tax paying citizens from spending even more of their hard earned money on welfare relief voted in by those too lazy to work themselves.

Totem

Sorry, Totem, you are dead wrong there. The GOP gets in touch with clergy with the hopes that they will energize their parish into voting. This is usually right before a sermon about abortion or gay people. It may not be the same thing as a tradional drive, but on the other hand, lower class people generally have a low percentage of voters.

Hmmm, I don't know that the GOP or the RNC gets in touch specifically with clergy or targets them (compared to any other demographic), but assuming the clergy you are talking about is theologically mainstream Christian, they are historically conservative due to the belief structure they are organized around.

I hope that doesn't sound circular, Lubey, but unless these are mega-churches that are being singled out, clergy in general tend to be less accepting of radical social change despite seeking social justice. Does that make sense to you?

Totem

Totem, I was off a bit, I'll give you that. The bush campaign just wanted lists of entire parishes so that they could contact them themselves, clergy and all, I would imagine.

link

link

link

Here is one that is marginally related, but more recent.

link

What do I have against voters being registered?

Nothing if you are asking me, except that whenever I go to the DMV it's packed with ne'r-do-wells and scummy looking people. It resembles the welfare office on check distribution day or the local soup kitchen at dinnertime.

In principle, easy access to voting registration seems like a good idea as long as it reaches all demographics. I believe voter registration would be better implemented in the income tax returns, thus insuring taxpayers are the ones being able to make the decisions in this country, not the uneducated and lazy.

Totem

Edited, Wed Sep 29 23:56:19 2004 by Totem

Would you be in favor of ammending the constitution to limit voting rights to taxpayers only then?

No, I wouldn't be in favor of a constitutional amendment, but you have to admit having income tax returns being the major threshold for voter registration makes a certain kind of sense wherein those with a vested interest in where their money goes involve themselves in the process. Mind you, there can be a mail-in form for those who don't file or a social security insta-registration for elderly who don't otherwise file income tax returns.

Totem

How is it important not to vote. It's just irresponsible in my view. Democracy should not be defined by those who do not vote.

Erm, if you have a license from another state, how does the new state get your picture to put on your new license? For that matter, I imagine most states have you come in now and then to get your vision test, etc. I dare say the DMV is a building most people enter at some point in their post-16 life.
Maybe you should go to DMV's in more affulent areas of town. Or it could be that the dregs of society outnumber the rich and beautiful people you'd rather see while waiting in line. Be that as it may, the unwashed masses are still eligible to vote. So far you have yet to provide any reason why the Republican attempts to stop the Motor Voter program were valid and not based on the fear that said unwashed masses might not be real keen on Republican policy. I'm sure your complaints that too many dirty poor people go to the DMV would do wonders to endear them to your philosophy though. I reccommend you start campaigning in the DMVs with that motto.

voting should never be compulsory. if someone isnt motivated enough to vote on their own then (in most cases) they arent educated enough to vote in an intelligent and informed manner.

do you really want the guy who flips a coin to decide which party he votes a straight ticket for (because if he doesnt he gets thrown in jail) deciding who should represent our country?

im obviously not saying he doesnt have every right to flip a coin to decide, but why force him to flip that coin if he doesnt want to?