2007-08-07 19:49:36 · 13 answers · asked by fullofideas4u 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Thanks for all the input . I didn/t really think that one out.
2007-08-07 20:00:06 · update #1
The electorate would appoint a president anyway.
2007-08-07 19:51:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
No prob not thinking it thru, sometimes we get ideas and go, WOW.
Yes, electorate would elect. The electorate has gone against the popular vote, but not very often, and I do not believe recently. I can look it up if you would like.
Voting is seen as a such a pain in the tush. Really, voting is our responsibility to the nation. So many refuse to vote, and then complain at what has happened during the vote.
My belief is this. Educate myself to the best of my ability. Discuss (not argue) with peers, friends and even strangers about their interp of issues and candidates. Have registration forms with me so I can give them to potential voters (even if they believe differently than me) and then remind everyone to vote. I offer to babysit, car pool, look up polling places, anything I can think of to help take away the excuses.
Voting, we owe it to ourselves, our nation and our future.
2007-08-07 20:09:18 · answer #2 · answered by halestrm 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, actually, the bad guys always win in that case, since they have paid for big businesses or lobbyists to vote, and they do.
They people are the ones without a voice, then.
Go vote, if you are a democrat, vote for who you want to run this time around. I'm a republican, I can't vote against Hillary.
I'm all for a female president, but Hillary seems like she has a major agenda, find out more about it and vote wisely.
2007-08-07 19:54:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is practically what happens every year with so few people turning up at the polls to vote. The big thing would be if every registered voter showed up to vote.
2007-08-07 19:53:44 · answer #4 · answered by vert 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It happened in the last elections with the Republicans losing the house and senate. A lot of their voters were fed up with their empty promises so they didn't go out and vote for them, and they lost.
2007-08-07 19:54:53 · answer #5 · answered by - 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i'm uncertain- a greater appropriate selection could be to circulate on a write-in vote strike- the place all of us write somebody in. There extremely is not any stable candidate working appropriate now. shall we continually write Jeff and Jimmie in for President and vice chairman, yet then they could might desire to take a pay shrink- and all of us could say that they cheated on the election.
2016-10-14 09:44:16 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i've been on strike for years....i'm afraid that many forget that we as americans also enjoy the right to dissent!
and i choose to dissent as far as the popular vote is concerned. it would be completely dishonest of me to go out and vote for one of only 2 choices, really, that i can't in good concience select. this doesn't mean that i lose my right to think for crying out loud! or to discuss issues!...i still live in this country whether i like it's politics or not and have a right to my opinion...as an american, right?
i'm a political aetheist
2007-08-07 20:21:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, Americans as a whole have not done anything that requires sacrifice since World War 2. What makes you think they would do something like that now?
2007-08-07 19:54:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm sure at least one person would vote, and then that person would decide the election. lol
2007-08-07 19:53:17 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
refused to vote? why?
sounds good to me then my one vote will decide....that would make it a dictatorship.
I rule;)
2007-08-07 19:52:57 · answer #10 · answered by Drago_65 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋