Gyroscopic Investing

Was going to post this under the "Who ya voting for thread" but thought it might be worthy of an independent discussion.

If you believe that one of the political parties represents your point of view then by all means you should vote for their candidate.

But what if you are like me and you think there is no significant difference between the two parties when it comes to things I care about - mainly liberty at home and minding our business abroad and that in fact the two parties represent a power bloc opposed to the things I value.

We are told that it is our civic duty to vote as Americans but, feeling the way I do, I contend that it is my civic duty and moral obligation not to vote.

"Consent of the governed" is a phrase synonymous with a political theory wherein a government's legitimacy and moral right to use state power is only justified and legal when derived from the people or society over which that political power is exercised.


If you march to the polls and vote you are registering your consent to be governed by the powers that be and giving them a mandate. I would rather the candidate who wins the election wake up the following morning knowing that he did not have the consent of the majority of Americans to govern.

But on the other hand, the power of the vote is the power to use coercion for self-defensive purposes, such as requiring GE frankenfoods to be clearly and adequately labeled.

There's more to voting than just the Presidential popular vote election.

First, you will have many state and local issues and elections on the same ballot. It may be easier to affect change in local politics anyway.

Also, I feel like if someone doesn't partake in the electoral process and politics in general, you have much less of a right to complain.

clacy wrote:Also, I feel like if someone doesn't partake in the electoral process and politics in general, you have much less of a right to complain.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeMGqTwWA6U

EDIT: Warning: George Carlin humor. Will definitely contain vulgar language.

craigr wrote:

clacy wrote:Also, I feel like if someone doesn't partake in the electoral process and politics in general, you have much less of a right to complain.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeMGqTwWA6U

EDIT: Warning: George Carlin humor. Will definitely contain vulgar language.

Craig you beat me to it. Carlin gave a great argument for not voting. I live in California so my vote or lack thereof is meaningless in the presidential race anyways. California is so in the tank for Obama that he could torture a puppy on live television and still carry this state. Memo to anyone who cares in Washington: We really need to get rid of the electoral college. Only the fact that there are some statewide ballot initiatives and local races of interest is motivating me to show up at the polls.

To echo what others have stated, there may be impactful local issues to consider. My ballot, for example, is full of propositions for tax hikes. No thanks! I feel like my vote will actually matter in these much smaller local matters.

As for the president, yeah, I might as well vote for Big Bird, since Obama would carry California if he publicly sold crippled orphans into slavery.

I will not be voting because I view Obama and Romney to be practically identical.  I love Gary Johnson but he’ll only get about 1% of the vote so what's the point?

I was recently watching watching this CSPAN discussion from Nov 1, 1996, and Harry Browne states he has not voted in 30 years.  http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Wash ... ournalFrid

ozzy wrote: I will not be voting because I view Obama and Romney to be practically identical.  I love Gary Johnson but he’ll only get about 1% of the vote so what's the point?

You could help him get 1.001%! 

But in all seriousness, be sure there aren't any local issues that might screw you. You don't want to stay home in protest of Obamney only to discover that your high school history teacher has been elected to the city council by a single vote (that happened in my hometown).

clacy wrote: Also, I feel like if someone doesn't partake in the electoral process and politics in general, you have much less of a right to complain.

This turns logic on its head in my book. If you participate in the process and agree to abide by the outcome then it seems to me that it is YOU that have given up the right to complain about it , not ME.

Harry Browne would probably call voting "a consumption value"--i.e., something you do because it makes you feel good. 

By this logic, I would say if voting makes you feel good then you should definitely vote.

The same goes for attending rallies, writing letters to your congressman and putting bumper stickers on your car.

If it feels good, do it!

I would have never guessed that Harry Browne and George Carlin would have the same opinion on voting, albeit from a different angle and with a different amount of tact.  But after thinking about it, their view of the world and politics was not that different.

I feel not knowing the issues is not a reason not to vote. I find a canyon of difference between the two main parties. Differences I don't want to live with. Plus Many people have died defending your right to vote. A wise man once said, "Only two defining forces have offered to died for you. Jesus Christ and the American G.I.. One died for your sins and the other died for your freedom".  Some may not believe in Jesus Christ.  But I have seen G.I.s died. Please vote. Thank you

I heard Gary Johnson on NPR the other afternoon.  I came away quite unimpressed, though I guess I shouldn't have expected much different.  I guess I'm really tired of hearing the Peter Schiff version of what's going to happen.

I think everyone should vote, as this is a right that many have died to give you the opportunity.

However, I wish voters were more informed and had as much skin in the game as every other voter.

Bean wrote: I think everyone should vote, as this is a right that many have died to give you the opportunity.

However, I wish voters were more informed and had as much skin in the game as every other voter.

We all have skin in the game... Whether you realize it or not is another story.

Ad Orientem wrote: Craig you beat me to it. Carlin gave a great argument for not voting. I live in California so my vote or lack thereof is meaningless in the presidential race anyways. California is so in the tank for Obama that he could torture a puppy on live television and still carry this state. Memo to anyone who cares in Washington: We really need to get rid of the electoral college. Only the fact that there are some statewide ballot initiatives and local races of interest is motivating me to show up at the polls.

Getting rid of the electoral college is not the solution, for it would empower the Democrats even more as all those major blue urban centers come into play over entire rural states.  Imagine CA being the entire country.

MediumTex wrote: The same goes for attending rallies, writing letters to your congressman and putting bumper stickers on your car.

Writing letters to Congress does have practical value when they need to tally up whether to be for or against pending legislation.  Browne was too much of an ideaologue.

Storm wrote:

Bean wrote: I think everyone should vote, as this is a right that many have died to give you the opportunity.

However, I wish voters were more informed and had as much skin in the game as every other voter.

We all have skin in the game... Whether you realize it or not is another story.

Agreed, but how much is my issue.

MachineGhost wrote:

MediumTex wrote: The same goes for attending rallies, writing letters to your congressman and putting bumper stickers on your car.

Writing letters to Congress does have practical value when they need to tally up whether to be for or against pending legislation.   Browne was too much of an ideaologue.

I would argue that writing letters is actually a lot more important than voting. It's direct and instant feedback for a legislator, whereas an election is a very imprecise and infrequent feedback mechanism. Legislators will often drop bad bills if they receive such a torrent of negative letters that it's clear they will be out of a job after the next election. This is the biggest reason why the NRA is so powerful. Their members (myself included) write letters in huge numbers.

In this 6min CSPAN interview Browne states he hasn't voted in 30 years:
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/BrowneCa

Ozzy,

That was a really good video. Thanks for posting. Looks like I'll be voting for Johnson of the Libertarian Party this year. Trying to spread the message, even if it doesn't really affect the 2012 election it might affect things in the future.

This one's for you, PS!

The Hidden Stakes of the Election

What this evidence suggests is that many of the biggest battles of the day—over health care reform, financial reform, environmental protection, workplace safety, civil rights—will ultimately be settled in court by lower-court judges in rulings that will get little public attention. The Supreme Court has upheld the Affordable Care Act, but some of the rules that are necessary to implement it may turn out to be vulnerable. Unlike presidents, judges often stay in their jobs for decades, and any president is in a position to shift the judiciary in major ways. Of course it is true that the 2012 presidential election will help to establish the meaning of the Constitution. Perhaps equally important, it will help to establish the fate of numerous rules designed to protect public safety, health, and the environment.

http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/20 ... -election/

You don't have to convince me MG; I completely agree on the judicial appointments angle. If I lived in a state where my vote even remotely mattered, I wouldn't hesitate to pull the lever for Romney. But again, in California, Obama will win even if he sets fire to a bus full of nuns and crippled orphans on live television.

Bean wrote: However, I wish voters were more informed and had as much skin in the game as every other voter.

I would like to see the "poll tax" reinstated