Joel Stein

Still undecided? Then just don't vote

Really, a high voter turnout doesn't make our democracy work better.
Joel Stein
October 10, 2008
» Discuss Article    (162 Comments)

Don't vote. People will try to guilt you into it, but stay strong and resist. I'm talking to all of you who don't feel strongly about either presidential candidate, not just those 80 undecided idiots seated at Tuesday's town hall-style debate. Those people just crave attention and are way too proud of skimming enough Google News headlines to formulate a question. Give each a hug and a Debate Attendee diploma and I bet they'll pick a candidate real fast.

Voting is not an act of charity. It doesn't help anyone else. It's an entirely selfish act of expressing your opinion and asking for policies you want. If your mere opinion added to our nation's well-being, it would be patriotic to take telemarketing calls. And I'd read the e-mails you send me.

A high voter turnout doesn't make our democracy work better. Canada typically has a turnout of more than 75%, and it has yet to pick a leader anyone's heard of. If voting truly helped other people, you'd get an orange drink and cookies along with that "I voted" sticker.

Almost half of those who are eligible won't vote this year, and that nonparticipation is a legitimate expression of feelings about our political system. You'll be saying that none of the contenders convinced you but that your vote is available next time to someone who does. It's what I say every week to "American Idol."

Organizations that try to increase voter turnout -- Rock the Vote, HeadCount, the New Voters Project, the League of Women Voters and the Dorky Self-Important Guy Whose Office Is Near Yours -- will try to guilt you into casting a ballot. Most will use the scare technique of telling you that if you don't vote, you will forfeit your right to complain, which, if there had just been some Jews at the Constitutional Convention, would have been ensured by an 11th Amendment.

But I'm pretty sure that not voting is the safest way to assure your right to complain. Because if you do vote, the odds are slightly better than even that you're going to vote for the winner, which will ruin your ability to gripe about him. If I were John McCain, I'd put all my money behind ads that say "Vote for me so you can complain for the next four years."

Last week, a heap of celebrities appeared in an online video, self-produced by Leonardo DiCaprio, sarcastically telling people not to vote. After DiCaprio, Ashton Kutcher, Natalie Portman, Usher, Demi Moore, Tobey Maguire and Ellen DeGeneres told you not to vote, Courtney Cox asked, "Who cares about your children's education?" Jamie Foxx added, "Who cares about global warming?" Halle Berry: "Don't vote. Unless you care about healthcare." Forest Whitaker mentioned welfare and the minimum wage, and Dustin Hoffman talked about gay rights and abortion rights. Then they all pretended they were going to wait around on screen until you click over to a site that will register you to vote. The superior, self-satisfied tone of the video not only made me not want to vote for president, it caused me to throw away my Writers Guild awards ballot.

Such campaigns to increase voter registration all seem disingenuous because they are. There's a reason all the organizations trying to increase the number of voters are full of liberals. It's because poor people, minorities, the undereducated and the young are the least likely to register; the higher the turnout among those groups, the better the Democrats do. The reason no one is trying to "Country Music the Vote" is because George Strait fans already vote. We don't "Rap the Vote" because the only words that rhyme with "vote" are the Democratic-unfriendly "Swift boat," "zygote" and "sports coat."

But it's not only the political scheming of Democrats. The entire ruling class wants you to vote for the same reason dictators claim a 100% turnout: Casting a ballot tricks you into believing you have as equal a stake in the power structure as the rich and connected. It's a basic political-science axiom that citizens are less likely to revolt if they feel they determined who gets to look down Arianna Huffington's blouse at political soirees.

So feel free not to vote. Just remember, if so many groups' main objective really were to strengthen democracy, America would have gotten rid of the electoral college by now.

jstein@latimescolumnists.com





Post Comment

Name
Enter your comments and post to forum
By participating you agree to our Terms of Service and represent that you are not under the age of 13.
 
Discussion


Comments will close after two days.
 
1. If your premise is that stupid people don't vote and shouldn't vote, then you totally contradict yourself when you note that "George Strait fans already vote." Considering that GW Bush - without doubt the worst and most disastrous President in history - was "elected" twice, there is little doubt that more than enough idiots are currently registered to vote. If the majority of currently unregistered voters would turn out against the atrocity that is McCain/Palin, then that makes them smarter and better voters than you, Mr. Stein.
Submitted by: What a moron
2:26 PM PDT, Oct 10, 2008
 
2. Hmm. I guess folks just won't comment either.
Submitted by: AmbroseKalifornia
2:20 PM PDT, Oct 10, 2008
 
3. Joel is right. But at this point, I would say to any undecided voters out there – please, don't vote. If you don't have an opinion by now, then don't try to express one. If the past eight years haven't left any kind of impression on you, then please, stay away from the voting boooth. Sit this one out.
Submitted by: Sarcastic fringehead
2:09 PM PDT, Oct 10, 2008
 




The U.S. needs to create a system that responds to labor market needs, provides more effective enforcement and offers a fair way to deal with those living here illegally.

   
The best in Southern California opinion journalism
Syfy Channel? Y o Y?
My television pretty much stays dark during the week, so it took until the...
more
The business and culture of our digital lives, from the L.A. Times
SuperFan, taking affinities further
Social networks are partly about broadcasting information to a far-flung...
more
 

ADVERTISEMENT



ADVERTISEMENT