Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Discarded LOVE votes. Send the message.

Posted 1 year ago on Sept. 19, 2012, 12:08 p.m. EST by alterorabolish1 (569)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I have advocated writing in LOVE on our ballots in November. I just got back from NY and participated in the Occupy anniversary. Several people there like this idea.

Writing LOVE on a ballot automatically means the vote will be discarded. Discarded votes are counted and there is always some discarded votes.

Let's make the discarded votes this year the most in history! Millions of voters that won't bother to vote might come out to vote if their vote was counted as discarded.

Corporate candidate A or B is certain to win the election. Imagine the pundits after the election describing how we elected a president, and discarded LOVE!

144 Comments

144 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

Excellent post 'aoa' and how about also working towards a Huge Voter Turnout and agitating for mass 'write-ins' for Stein, Sanders, Nader, McKinney, Kucinich, Johnson etc ?! We must think 'out of the box' and get our heads out of 'The DemoCrap / RepubliCon Faux-Binary Construct' !!

The Entire voting system has been thoroughly subverted and co-opted and The 99% must reclaim it - with 'Manually Counted Paper Ballots' being the bare minimum safeguard against demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy in "The United States of Amnesia" (Gore Vidal, RIP).

Do not be resigned to duopolistic 'electoralism' (you're not going to find that word in a dictionary - but you'll get what I mean!) and think that voting is the only avenue of change, instead regard it as only one aspect or tactic. Inability to see this may be missing the point of OWS.

The "goal" is NOT merely just "to change the structure of government" - it is to fundamentally reclaim 'The Lincolnian Definition' of "Government OF The People ; FOR the People ; BY The People" and to restore the demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy that The U$A has become. The 99% deserve no less.

dum spiro, spero ...

[-] 2 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

"that government of the people, for the people, and by the people, shall not perish from the earth."

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

Re. "that government of the people, for the people, and by the people, shall not perish from the earth." --- well, though it is a genuine question as to, to what extent it has ever existed at all in The U$A, the current reality is that even the very notion is under very real threat of 'perishing'.

New ideas (re.'voting' etc.) and also the conjoining and simultaneous activating of several new and old techniques and tactics will have to be actively employed to reverse and prevent the further inexorable slide into 'demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy U$A'. It can be done.

veritas vos liberabit ...

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

The government of the people, for the people and by the people is already over. Our government answers to lobbyists and campaign donors, not to the people. Because politicians can't stay in power without accepting campaign financing from wealthy benefactors. Changing that would fundamentally change our government by making politicians answer to their constituents instead of to financial backers.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/common-ground-one-way-forward-there-should-be-no-c/

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

"The government of the people, for the people and by the people is already over." ... maybe so from one perspective. However, I would suggest that the 'The Plutocratic Oligarchs' just want us to just roll over and defer to their chosen 'politicians'.

True Anarchists are at the forefront of new ideas re. True, Direct, Participatory Democracy, so see ;

M.K.Gandhi said : "Healthy discontent is the prelude to progress" and also "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Re His Ideas :

Finally also consider : Regular Mass Non-Violent Actions Are Very Scary To The 0.01% Ruling Class.

per ardua ad astra ...

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

Ineffective mass non-violent actions aren't scary to anybody.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

Let me know if you ever make it out of your comfy armchair to organise a 'Parade for The 99%' so that I can attain a smug, lofty position ; take my willy out and piss on it, too !!

verum ex absurdo ...

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

This proposal deserves to be pissed on. Voluntarily disenfranchising yourself is idiotic.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

Not Voting = "Voluntarily disenfranchising yourself", right ?! You also regard nearly 50% of US voters as merely "idiotic" it seems, lol. Your puppy-like loyal attachment to merely 'Voting Within The Existing Defunct Paradigm' is laughable. What you are doing here is 'Shilling For The Status Quo', imho - but what do I know, huh ? So we'll leave it for readers to judge.

ad iudicium ...

[-] -1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

Yes, I do regard eligible voters who choose not to participate in our democracy as "idiotic". Especially when they spend lots of time complaining about how our government is not responsive to their concerns. You're not going to change Washington by marching around New York banging on pots and pans.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

Consider : OWS wants to do more than just "change Washington" - it wishes to fundamentally shift The 'Faux-Duopoly ; Demoblican-Republocrat ; Two-Factions - One Ruling - Austerity & WAR Party' Ethos of The U$A & the reality is that "Washington" is broken beyond repair. It seems that you're really quite conservative and reactionary, aren't you ?

nosce te ipsum ...

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

If that's the goal then this site is failing spectacularly because this site is extremely preoccupied with partisan squabbling.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

I do not speak for this site & your querulous and negativist nature and comments are duly noted.

Finally consider that "partisan" is totally understandable less than 50 days before The POTUS (S)election but few here are fooled by The Faux Choice. The Real Work stars after November !!

multum in parvo ...

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

It's understandable, but it's a sign of weakness. It's a sign of a lack of discipline among people who claim to be fighting for the entire 99% and not just half of them.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

'"Half of them" ?! That sounds a bit like 'Romoney and Obomber', lol !! However, "discipline" IS indeed, very important - I do agree with that !!!

OWS is too amorphous right now to easily implement any 'discipline' and that is both a strength AND a weakness, imo. I feel in real life - we may well agree on far mote than we don't.Thus I bear you no ill will.

pax et lux ...

[-] -3 points by jimmyCartersDogRambo (-28) 1 year ago

Is it negative to remark the problem of partisan politics on this site? In my opinion, TechJunkie is making a good point, although, obviously, I understand that for a member of Partisan Powers his worthy remark is construed as being negative.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

Maybe you should whisper by PM & try to recruit 'TJ' for the 'TrashyTrollTeamBot' - his points must look exceedingly juicy for your 'TrashyTrojanHorseBot' plans !!

Also, re below - "three more members" = 'three new monikers' l!!

minima maxima sunt ...

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

@ 'TheTrashBucket' below : This is you down to a tee. Pushing 'wedge-issues' and craving division. 'Jart' would ban you and your "Million Monikers' too if she had time and resources to track your 'tech-savvy' ; 'bot employing' ; 'VPN using' ; spamming - mean-minded, mendacious & manipulative (x) !!!

honi soit qui mal y pense ...

[-] -3 points by jimmyCartersDogRambo (-28) 1 year ago

Also, re below - "three more members" = 'three new monikers' l!!

Do you have as problem with the Man of a Million Monikers? You shouldn't because your team, Partisan Powers, does very much the same thing. The difference is that I'm honest about it. DKAtoday and VQkag2 are not. They got caught red handed using monikers and doing intense vote manipulation. Jart deemed it was OK and that is why they are still here.

[-] -3 points by jimmyCartersDogRambo (-28) 1 year ago

We already gained three more members this week for The Crew For OWS Factuality, aka, Bridge To The Ground. We're tightening up now. We only accept new members who partake in OWS protests and other ground activities.

[+] -4 points by jimmyCartersDogRambo (-28) 1 year ago

A member of Partisan Powers not voting for Obama?

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

Please go piss on an electrified-fence now, 'TrashyTrollTeamTechTyrant' ;-)

spero ...

[-] -3 points by jimmyCartersDogRambo (-28) 1 year ago

You are the bodyguard of Partisan Powers are you not? The Partisan Powers who dream of an ever ending Obama reign. How many times have you called me a troll simply because I do not like Obama and friends? Like VQkag2, you consider me a republican because I hate both parties. Do you also write letters to the president like your leader and our moderator, DKAtoday?

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

Observe : The reactionary, faux-radical 'TrashyTrollBoT', talking outta his (x) - yet again !!!

cave - anguis in herba ...

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

Getting a huge voter turnout is exactly what I'm hoping this idea would create. This is thinking outside the box, allowing people to shout together that we don't like the way things are, and we want real change now.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

This is not thinking outside the box - it is thinking to be done in a padded room.

[-] 1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

Yessir, this is crazy talk!

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

discarding your vote certainly is crazy if you expect it to have a positive effect on anything.

[-] 1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

By myself that would be true. However, if millions caught the fever...

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Millions already throw away their voice/vote. It gets remarked upon every election - makes no difference to the election the process or the candidates - except that those who opted out could have elected a Bernie Sanders or a Jill Stein or a Rocky Anderson - but they did not vote so that did not happen. You R suggesting nothing new.

[-] -2 points by jimmyCartersDogRambo (-28) 1 year ago

How would manually counting ballots change a thing? It would be a waste of time and resources. The problem is not that the voting results are tricked, it's that all the candidates are corrupted and work for the 1%. Money has invaded our political system from every conceivable angle. Sure, you can ask them to count, and they will be happy too. They'll give you a precise number telling you by how much Obama or Romney won. They'll be glad to because it won't make the slightest difference except to give you the illusion that democracy is working. The 1% will control how things work no matter what. This is not a representative democracy anymore, it's an oligarchy and no amount of manual ballot counting will change that.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

'Tr@shy' : An almost cogent comment ! I'm almost tempted to reply effusively !! But no - I don't think, so - cos I know you et ergo - I do not like you !!!

Suffice it to say reflect on the mathematics and consider that - "New ideas (re.'voting' etc.) and also the conjoining and simultaneous activating of several new and old techniques and tactics will have to be actively employed to reverse and prevent the almost inexorable slide into 'demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy U$A'. It can be done."

Try to be a good boy & if you want an argument, try 'aoa' as it is his post and thread & see if he'll oblige.

temet nosce ...

[-] -3 points by jimmyCartersDogRambo (-28) 1 year ago

I always provided thoroughly constructed arguments, and you always reply with red herrings and other such logical fallacies. Such is the difference between a critical thinker and a conspiracy theorist.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19943) 1 year ago

'Tr@shBot' : You're a self-declared "critical thinker" only engaging in auto-erotic "Illogical Fellatio" !!

nosce te ipsum ...

[-] -3 points by jimmyCartersDogRambo (-28) 1 year ago

As I said, only ad hominem, red herrings, and other logical fallacies. I guess some feel like insulting other users is the way to build a strong argument.

[-] 2 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

People who don't vote don't get represented. No politician is going to answer to a constituency that doesn't vote. If you want government to be more responsive to your concerns then the way to do that is by participating. If you can't find anybody to vote for then run your own candidates. Banging on pots and pans and holding picket signs isn't going to change our government. Participating in it can.

[-] 2 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

I don't understand why anyone thinks I'm advocating not voting! I am encouraging people to vote, in a radical way that sends the message that we're unhappy with our political process. The pundits would point out after the election that A or B was elected, but Love was discarded!

[-] 2 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

You're encouraging people to intentionally throw away their votes. Which is the same as not voting.

[-] 0 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

No, it's not the same at all.

[-] 2 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

Yes, failing to register a vote is the same thing as not voting. Just showing up at a polling place doesn't count as successfully voting. Handing in a ballot with no valid votes on it also doesn't count.

And PS: the optical scanners won't even notice whatever you scribble on your ballot. They're just looking for valid votes. If your ballot contains no valid votes then it will be recorded as a failed vote, and nobody will care about it because they'll be a lot more interested in the results from the people who did successfully register votes.

[-] 1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

Don't they have to give a total of all ballots, whether they're valid or not?

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

The only ones that matter are the ones with votes on them. Absentee ballots sometimes aren't even counted unless they would matter, to save time and money. So who would care? That's not a winning strategy for gaining political representation.

[-] 0 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

It would be a winning strategy if 50 million voters had their votes discarded. The power would change if people knew they could get more votes discarded than the winner of the election.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

Your ideas on why "power would change" because of all of these non-voters is very vague and nebulous. Millions of people already don't vote. Politicians don't care about those people. They care about people who vote.

[-] 2 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

You're exactly right, they care about people who vote. I am strongly encouraging people to vote, just in a different way.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

No. You're encouraging people not to vote.

That's the most obvious problem with your proposal. Another is that it's unrealistic to think that "millions" of Occupiers and/or supporters are going to form a consensus about following the same course of action, all in lockstep. Your idea doesn't work unless a mass of people all do the same thing, and one of the things that's clear about Occupy at this point is that there is no consensus. About anything. So aside from the fact that Occupy doesn't have "millions" of people in the first place, even if it did, they wouldn't all form into a single, coherent bloc of people all doing the same thing. People here can't agree on whether people should vote or not, whether Occupy should run candidates, or even on whether Occupy should focus on a single goal. The one thing that everybody seems to agree on is that they don't plan to agree on everything at any point. Which makes your proposal impossible, aside from being ineffective.

[-] -2 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

Voting is much different than not voting, obviously. I can hear the pundits now asking why did so many voters intentionally have their votes discarded. People would not feel as if they threw away their vote if they voted for Love.

[-] 3 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

You're talking about voluntarily disenfranchising yourself. With no clear objective. Politicians are going to ignore you, since you don't vote. If you don't vote for either the politician or his opponent then the politician isn't going to care that you exist. So your views will continue to be underrepresented in Washington.

[+] -4 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

What you say would be true if only a few people participated. Similar to 3rd party voting.

If millions of voters participated, politicians would not ignore it. The clear objective would be that next time, discarded might get more votes than any candidate. That's a wonderful objective.

[-] 4 points by LetsGetReal (1420) from Grants, NM 1 year ago

No, that's not wonderful That's stupid. Discarded votes don't elect anyone better. Votes for an alternative candidate would.

[-] -3 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

No one here is going to be satisfied with the corporate candiate that's annointed, except those that believe Obama will change his ways.

Discarded votes in huge numbers would send the message we want to send!

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

And your message would be do as you please because I don't care.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

no.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

That is the message if you opt out - discard your vote - the message says go right on ahead with your plans.

Organize 3rd or 4th or 5th party voting promote 3rd or 4th or 5th party candidates - share the information about them on the internet - drum-up support for real people who want to work for the People.

Writing a message on your ballot is just throwing away any voice you have for nothing - no gain.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

no.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

whatever Matt

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

sorry

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

You don't owe me an apology.

[-] 1 points by LetsGetReal (1420) from Grants, NM 1 year ago

I'm not talking about a corporate candidate. I'm talking about voting for Rocky Anderson or Jill Stein or any of the myriad other candidates who are neither Dem nor Rep.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Anointed???

Now I know it's you who needs the enema. You didn't think I was going to let that insult go did you?

It just proved to me how full shit you really are.

[-] 0 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

I apologize for that remark. Trying to get some work done and got frustrated.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

You do this at work, or this is your work?

[-] 1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

I am still working, but my business is failing.

[-] 3 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 1 year ago

If millions of people were to do that then the politicians would still only be interested in the results from the people who actually did vote.

[-] -2 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

A vote that's discarded is a vote. They would be interested because they would be constantly asked about the discarded voters.

[-] 3 points by Mooks (1985) 1 year ago

They probably wouldn't give a damn. The day after an election people talk about the winner and they talk about the loser but they aren't going to talk about discarded votes. Politicians, the media, the public, etc..I can't see anyone really caring because a discarded vote is really no different than not voting at all.

Vote 3rd party. There are a ton of choices. Jill Stein, Gary Johnson, and Rocky Anderson are just 3 that come to mind and each state will have a handful of others.

[-] 0 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

It would be much different than not voting at all if millions of votes were discarded.

If any of the 3rd party candidates got a significant amount of votes, that would be interesting. I don't believe all of the 3rd party candidates together will get significant amounts of votes because 90 million people won't bother to vote. The idea won't work unless there is some buzz to make them discard millions of votes. Somehow create motivation to vote.

[-] -2 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

I agree with your position. It makes the most sense for occupiers to discard their vote. It's a question of integrity. I believe the system is broken beyond repair and that is why I take part in Occupy. Voting for the lesser evil would be a loss of integrity for me, and I truly believe democracy only shines when people truly express what they believe in. Strategic voting hurts democracy.

[-] 0 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

I had already decided to vote 3rd party as Chris Hedges recently suggested was all we could do, but I would like something that screams, none of the above. If the pundits calculated that over 90% of the discarded votes were for Love, it would send a beautiful message.

[-] -1 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

Agreed. Voting makes no sense if you don't believe in the system.

[-] 1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

Voting makes sense and should be encouraged as much as possible. If the system is corrupt, we have to vote another way.

[-] -1 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

I phrased that wrong. Discarding a vote is voting. I meant voting for a particular candidate when you do not believe in him or her makes no sense and actually harms democracy.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5854) 1 year ago

Don't vote for candidates you don't believe in. Create a list of demands for candidates to be legally bound to.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/free-democracy-amendment/

Take direct action in forcing the issues to be primary in determining who will step up to get the votes.

[-] -1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

Discarding a vote is indeed voting. Many voters know very little about the 3rd party candidates and could possibly harm democracy.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Aw shit......:(

I can't argue with you on this one junkie. I'm in complete agreement.......:)

Argue all you want about whatever you want, but when the time comes, get out there and vote.

[-] 1 points by evileye (11) 1 year ago

So you're suggesting people waste their vote. You can write all the crap you want on a ballot, it doesn't change the fact that someone will be elected by the electoral college. That is just insanity.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

and if it did?

[-] 1 points by evileye (11) 1 year ago

Did what? Not voting is just wasting your vote. If you don't vote, you don't get to complain about the outcome. This is why OWS never made any progress. Everyone just wants to complain, but not doing anything about the situation. This is a fad that is on it's last legs.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

if writing in issues were counted, recorded ad reported

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

Name an election where they reported non registered votes?

[-] 0 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

Not able to name one, never been significant. They would have to if this caught on and millions were discarded. They have to count total number or ballots cast, subtract the votes for candidates and you have the number.

[-] 1 points by Lokibro57 (-4) 1 year ago

It was nice to meet you, and your sons at S17. I missed not seeing you at Liberty Square Monday. It was a beautiful day/night of people organizing, networking, and tons of good conversation with people from all over the country......great lasagna, and S17 birthday cake too!! lol I had a good conversation with an intelligent young lady from Occupy Santa Barbara who had heard of the good work that Occupy Town Square was doing. I in turn hooked her up with one of OTS's bright young members, and they went on to having a long conversation. I hated to leave that night, as I knew that i would soon be amongst people who have never stood up for anything that they believe in. When i did leave the park at around 10:30, I went on to do jail watch, which turned out to be my most memorable, and satisfying experience during the S17 weekend.

Although I was a bit younger than your sons at the time my Dad attended MLK's March on Washington, I hope it does not take them as long as it took me to be proud of their Dad for standing up for what is right.

Love and Solidarity my Friend....~Odin~

[-] 1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

It was certainly great to meet you and I noticed your sacrificial spirit Saturday and Sunday. I thought you had to leave Sunday night. Anyway, my sons and I had a fantastic time, our first time ever in NY. Occupy Town Square has a good thing going and I believe it will be successful, possibly the direction for Occupy itself. I hope we meet again.

Love and Solidarity to you.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

Why not vote for elmer fudd or bugs bunny or jerry falwell or caligula ?
MILLIONS of Americans died so you could vote for someone REAL
you are spitting on their graves

[-] 1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

Discarding elmer fudd or bugs bunny isn't the same as discarding millions of votes for LOVE! Think about discarding love.

Why vote for someone real, they are going to annoint Corporate candidate A or B?

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

Who will TRY to cut taxes for the 99% ? Who will TRY to cut taxes for the 1%

[-] 3 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

Neither corporate candidate A or B will accomplish what you are asking. One may speak words to that effect but neither will make it happen

You are spitting on the graves of those that died to protect our right to vote by accepting the Corporatism takeover of our political process! When you and enough people join us, we can change things.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

You need to be aware of this speech by the founder of "modern conse(R)vatism", Paul Weyrich.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw

BTW, he was also key in the founding of ALEC.

He was also the first president of the Heritage Foundation.

[-] 1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

I watched the video but it's not relevant to my position at all.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

The result is very relevant to your position.

Trust me the Heritage Foundation doesn't care about how it gets there, it cares about the result.......and the result of what you are calling for is the exactly the same as Weyrichs.

Exactly.

[-] -1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

You need an enema.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Well, that comment clarifies your actual feelings, as well as the depth of your analysis..............shallow as all hell.

Go puck a rubber co-opter.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Opting out with a love vote is doing nothing to help the peoples situation.

People need to get involved and stay involved.

From Bernie Sanders to every OWS/Occupy group.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HSaZOSWfrU

Sounds like good advice.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

I'm thankful for Bernie Sanders, he's speaking out, including admitting that our government is bought.

Why do you believe, that trying to get 90 million people that won't bother to vote because they know it doesn't make any difference, is opting out? I am trying to convince people to vote, but vote and be counted as discarded.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Being discarded is the same as not voting - people need to get involved and stay involved to change our political system. And to get people involved takes outreach and education. Support measures like Move to Amend.

[-] 1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

Being discarded is NOT the same as not voting because the person voted and their vote is counted as discarded. I was in NY this past weekend at OWS supporting the cause. Outreach and education is fine but we need to make a statement that our political process is corrupt, and we insist it be changed.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Fine - then maybe you should be circulating speeches made by Bernie Sanders and by Jill Stein and by Rocky Anderson and others who speak out against how things are currently being done in "OUR" ( in name only at the moment ) Government. Start showing support for real people who are for supporting the People.

[-] 1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

I look forward to voting for real people in the future. Right now I'm concerned that our elections and government are corrupted.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

No Shit? Government corrupted? Why I never imagined such a thing. Huh. And you propose to make Government better - by What(?) - doing Nothing(?) - that just does not make any sense at all.

[-] 0 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

You propose to make it better by legitimizing it with your vote? That makes no sense. OWS was created to protest. That's how you makes things better, not by giving support to the system by casting a vote for the 1%.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

BS - Direct Democracy "IS" all about getting involved to make a difference - all you are proposing is to just sit on the side and watch the world continue to crumble.

[-] -1 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

Direct democracy is indeed about getting involved, but it's not about getting involved with the current representative democracy. It's an entirely different system, and it's incompatible with representative democracy.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that I don't think we should get involved. Discarding a vote is getting involved just as much as voting for a particular candidate. It's the "none of the above" choice. It's a legitimate choice. It expresses my belief in the election better than any other democratic choice that is given to me. Also, protesting is getting involved. I belief we should all get in the streets and protest as much as possible. Finally, participating in OWS version of direct democracy even though it is not part of the official system is also getting involved because it gives a good example of what we could have instead.

I'm more involved than most US citizens. I protested many times for OWS.

I find it concerning how you put words in my mouth. Can you show me where I claimed we should not get involved? Let's have a serious discussion like adults. There's no need to put words in my mouth. I have been honest and I have explained my position as best as possible. I have respected you and have not insulted you. Please, return the favor in our future contacts.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

I have not put words in your mouth - I have explained what your words mean in "reality" of the inaction you propose.

[-] -1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

90 million people don't bother to vote because they don't believe it makes any difference. It only takes a few seconds to write Love on a ballot, and that vote would be counted as discarded. I dream of 50 million unlikely voters feeling good that they participated in sending a beautiful message.

It would be a message that might change the world!

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

You are dreaming. Direct Democracy will not happen by opting out - no matter what "YOU" want to call it.

[-] -1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

Again, why are you saying I'm advocating, "opting out", when I am strongly encouraging people to vote!

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

U R not encouraging people to vote - U R encouraging people to throw away their vote.

[-] 0 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

False. Discarding your vote shows you made a deliberate effort to not partake in the system. Not voting does not show that. It's entirely different.

It's a question of integrity. If you believe the system is corrupted and broken beyond repair as most OWS supporters do, then voting makes no sense as it goes against your position. This is the reason many OWS supporters choose not to vote but to protest instead and to demonstrate a better form of politics with direct democracy.

In short, voting legitimizes the system we are against. This is a contradiction.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

How in the world do you expect to change or replace a system - by not getting involved?

Protest? Yes people need to know what is wrong and needs fixing.

So besides protesting to let people know what is wrong - how do you expect change to be made if no one gets involved to make the needed changes?

Direct Democracy would be a change in the system - how do you get it in place if you are opting out?

[-] -3 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

A discarded vote is getting involved. In my case, it's the best way for me to express my beliefs in the upcoming election. I believe the system is broken beyond repair and needs to be replaced. A vote for a candidate would not show this, it would instead legitimize the system. It's about integrity. I believe democracy can only shine if people vote for what they believe in. My discarded vote expresses what I believe.

As for direct democracy, it cannot be implemented within the current system as it conflicts directly with representative democracy. To implement Occupy's idea of direct democracy, we would first need to take down the current system. One way to do this is to discard your vote to show that you do not believe in the system any longer. Another way is to protest loud and clear in the street. What's important is that we are consequential with how we interact with democracy. For me, it would be absolutely inconsequential with my belief if I voted for a candidate. It would be a travesty to democracy if I didn't use it to express exactly how I feel. A discarded vote does that, and that's why I am discarding my vote.

If you believe in a candidate and the system, then I would suggest you vote for that person. What's important is that you have integrity when engaging in democratic actions. I joined Occupy because I don't believe in the system any longer. If I still did, I would have joined an existing party, or would have created one myself.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

So you go ahead and opt out - that is your choice your right - but if everyone did the same - know what would happen(?) - NOTHING.

NOTHING - EXCEPT - The current system would keep rolling along getting more and more corrupt with each passing moment.

[-] -2 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

If everyone opted out it would make a huge impact on the election and people would start to wonder why the system displeases everybody. If we do like you and vote for something we don't believe in, we harm the democratic process by not honestly engaging in it. This legitimizes the corrupt system and this makes sure it keeps rolling along and getting more and more corrupt. When did voting help our system? Never. My dream is that everyone did discard their vote. It would make the biggest impact the US elections have ever seen.

What's important is that you express yourself as honestly as possible through the democratic process. This is the only way to make democracy better. If you feel there is a candidate that truly deserves your vote, then you should vote for him or her, if not, then you should discard your vote.

And, by the way, you do not need to use capslock. It is rude to do this on the Internet as it indicates screaming. I can understand you without this. Let's try to have a civil conversation. We are adults no? We are simply expression opinions, there is no reason to scream if they differ.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Everyone opt out huge impact - BS - polls close early - and the elctoral college ( which needs to be done away with ) makes the call as to who will be president or any other position being run for on the ballot.

Not the huge impact that I would want to see.

[-] -1 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

If everyone opted out as you say, then nobody would get a single vote. This would create a huge impact.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Only in your mind(?) - gotta kinda wonder about your state of mind - when you spout non-sense and claim to believe it.

[-] 1 points by LetsGetReal (1420) from Grants, NM 1 year ago

How is that better than voting for a third party candidate? I have never seen the number of "discarded" ballots shown on election results, but they always show the votes for third party candidates.

[-] 2 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

The number of discarded ballots is counted, but the numbers previously have been small and not interesting. If there were 50 million discarded votes, it would be talked about.

Ross Perot got more votes than Jill Stein and Rocky Anderson will get combined. It's a helpless feeling that makes the duopoly more powerful and causes voters to stay home the next time. It would be very radical to have 50 million discarded Love votes.

[-] 2 points by LetsGetReal (1420) from Grants, NM 1 year ago

State laws vary. I have never lived anywhere that discarded ballots were reported.

If you put your efforts towards getting people to vote for an alternative candidate, they would get a lot of votes. Your outlook is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Imagine how radical it would be to have 50 million votes for Stein and/or Rock. That would get their attention, not love notes.

[-] -2 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

It is my understanding that discarded votes are counted, and would be reported if the amount were newsworthy.

I believe voters would believe they were wasting their vote if they chose between any of the 3rd party candidates, that's the way it has been in the past.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Not really. It would be considered anecdotal and the result would be Paul Weyrich's dream.

Did I mention he also co-founded the "moral majority"?

[-] 0 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

False. It has happened before in many countries that discarded votes were counted and shown in the news because the numbers were important. However, this does not matter. Your vote should come from the heart and it should show your integrity. If you do not believe in the system, a discarded vote is the best way to vote. This is what I will be doing because I have integrity. Strategic voting, as in voting for the lesser evil instead of voting for what you believe, harms democracy. The best democracy is when the vote of individuals clearly show what they truly believe in.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

How's that work with a Diebold machine?

This is a conse(R)vative dream. That's all it is.

Try taking it to the Heritage forums and see how far you get.

[-] 0 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

It has nothing to do with conservatives, it has to do with voting your conscience and expressing how you feel about the election. It's the core of democracy. I believe the system is broken, a discarded vote is the best way for me to show it. It's about integrity. If you believe in a candidate, then you should vote for him or her. I don't believe in legitimizing any of the candidates in our current corrupted system.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Ahhh, but the result is exactly the same. So it does support an extremely conse(R)vative position.

A position, I might add, that is against everything Occupy stands for.

A position that is perhaps the most corrupted of all.

you didn't explain how it would work with a Diebold machine either,

[-] 1 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

The result is not the same. This is the point you fail to understand. OWS stands for the idea that the system is corrupted, and the best way to express this is to discard your vote and protest.

If the Diebold machine does not permit the discarding of votes, then we should ask that this option be added. Until then, you are aware that you can demand to cast a written vote under US law are you not? Nothing forces you to cast your vote using this machine.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

In other words, you have no idea what you are actually talking about.

Good to know.

Now how would the result be any different than what Weyrich and Heritage and the moral majority were/are shooting for?

How is it any different than the (R)epelican't voter purges?

How are YOU any different from any of those?

[-] -1 points by FranciscoSuez (-11) 1 year ago

I already explained how the result is different. Discarding your vote expresses your discontent with the system, not voting does not do this as there is no way of knowing why you did not vote.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

I'm sorry, but no you haven't explained that.

Why would an anecdotal story in press make any difference to the result?

The result would equal Weyrich desire.

[-] 1 points by LetsGetReal (1420) from Grants, NM 1 year ago

To show the type of candidate you do support. To help third party candidates qualify for public election funding. To help third parties attain minor or major party status in states, which gives them easier access to running candidates in the future. To say thank you to one of the candidates who has dedicated a lot of their time and money to get their message out.

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

I don't get it.

Advocate voting for someone who represents you. Like Jill Stein.

[-] -3 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

I like Jill Stein and she would be my number 1 candidate. My heart drops though when I realize that my vote would be wasted because everyone knows it's going to be either Obama or Romney. If I thought there was any chance that all of the 3rd party candidates together would get a significant percentage of the votes, I would vote for her. History shows that wouldn't happen.

However, 90 million voters will not go to the polls because they do not believe it makes any difference whether they vote or not. Could they be motivated to vote if there was a simple way for them to show how they really feel about this corporate puppet show? A real chance to send a message!

It would only take seconds to write Love on a ballot and turn it in. These ballots are counted as discarded ballots along with other discarded ballots. If enough voters wrote Love on their ballot, the number of discarded ballots would dominate the discussion after corporate candidate A or B is elected. A voter could feel good about sending the message that they were discarded voting for Love, while Corporatism shudders to think their puppet show is cracking.

A corporate candidate wins, and Love is discarded. Our reality.

[-] 3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

If the 90 million people voted... their candidate of choice would win every time.

There is no excuse for apathy

[-] 0 points by LeoYo (5854) 1 year ago

Of course, 90 million people wouldn't all support the same candidate and any candidate not legally bound to serve the interests of the people will naturally serve the interests of their biggest campaign contributers. To make a difference, voters have to have the means of forcing the changes they desire http://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-template/ .

[-] -2 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

I agree that there is no excuse for apathy yet you and I are suffering because of it. Can we solve the problem of apathy? I don't believe we can by informing people or any of the other ways that have been tried in the past.

People like new things, especially if they're simple and they sense others feel the same way. A discarded vote for Love might unite and motivate these people to actually vote, possibly stirring their soul.

[-] 3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

voting for love will literally do nothing. I think voting for love would only further apathy because you are so apathetic that instead of voting for a third option you're writing in nonsense and not even voting.

Sorry to be so blunt.

[-] 0 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

No problem. Voted 3rd party before and felt helpless as you will this year. Obviously I like the idea of discarded ballots, I believe it might be a cure for apathy.

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

that's why I suggest writing in NO WAR

at least there is a direction of action

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

why not just vote for a person that wants to end the wars?

Like Jill Stein, Rocky Anderson, or Gary Johnson

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (1621) 1 year ago

Jill Stein is the BEST candidate running! But you know she can never win. If enough of us vote for her, or the other 3rd parties maybe the D/R's will get a message. Probably not. Better to get in the streets to send our message. If we are outraged enough when the current corrupt politicians are voting for something we don't like (war, weak financial reform) they might be swayed.

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (1621) 1 year ago

Noble cause! Has there ever been no war?

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

under Carter possibly

[-] 1 points by 99nproud (1621) 1 year ago

Carters grandson just burned Romney.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Did you get that enema yet??

You really should. I would recommend a high colonic.

Yes, you are talking about apathy to cure apathy.

Everything else is bullshit.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

exactly... you can't solve apathy with apathy.

You can't fix the corrupt system by supporting the corrupt system either.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Perhaps not, but you can replace the defective parts.

Couldn't hurt to try.