Are people who do not vote more progressive or more stupid than those who do?

[LoZoccolo]

[Tom Joad]

1. Hey, that's a cool way to encourage voter participation...

call those who don't vote "stupid"!

Brilliant!

Or maybe not...

[LoZoccolo]

2. It may be the coolest idea to get out the vote ever.

1. Those who are not stupid want to avoid being stupid, and thus are motivated to stop being stupid by voting.
2. Those who are stupid do not want to avoid being stupid, and thus we really don't know what will make them vote.

[Zensea]

3. You forgot an option -- Are people that vote in this poll stupid?

:evilgrin:

[iamjoy]

4. Neither

They are more cynical, or more lazy but not necessarily more or less intelligent.

Now people who vote Republican...

[Davis_X_Machina]

5. The Vanishing Voter project looked at the demographics of the non-voter...

...in 2000, again more narrowly at the youth vote in 2004, and found they aren't a whole lot different than voters in nearly every regard. The party alignment of non-voters, and their broad ideological alignment, indicate that the often-heard claim that if non-voters voted, there'd be a progressive tidal wave is simply wishful thinking.

The Shorenstein Center at the JFK School of Gov't had all this stuff up until recently, but now that the 2004 election is receding into history, and they're trying to sell a book on the topic, a lot of it isn't world-visible any more

[ixion]

6. so, to vote for someone who does not represent what you believe is smart?

I would argue the logic in that.

[LoZoccolo]

10. I do not think that I said that. n/t

[LWolf]

7. Other. They are more disenfranchised. Some are more

discerning. Seeing things from an outside perspective, rather than from either of the major "sides" can broaden the viewpoint. Many non-voters don't vote because they acknowledge the pointlessness of the whole thing. Their votes will never, in the current climate and system, achieve what they would achieve, so they view their votes as wasted, or as useless emotional venting.

I know this; I have an adult son who will not vote. I have discussed this with him and with his non-voting friends, at length for the decade that they've been eligible to vote. A lively debate, with me always weighing in on the side of participation. They always win in the end, though, because their bottom line is true, and I can't and won't argue against truth. The current system is corrupt. The current system doesn't give a rat's ass for the people it purports to represent, and a vote within the current system does nothing to further the fundamental changes necessary.

If either major party were to allow the nomination someone outside the corporate power-holding mainstream, someone who did not simply spout rhetoric and talking points while maintaining the current balance of power, I could probably get some of them to participate, for that one election. Then they'd sit back and see if their vote really made the kind of difference that they want. If the vote won't make a difference, they won't use it. Telling them that "top tier" democrats will make that kind of difference is pissing in the wind.

[Infinite Hope]

8. Progress: "Favoring or promoting progress." No progress comes from not voting.

That's hardly progressive.

[renie408]

9. You need to ad some categories or something

I despise non-participation, but I am not sure that those who don't vote are 'stupid'.