This is an archived article. Please check my homepage for more up to date articles.
It happens far too often, individuals complain about the leaders that represent our country; despite the fact that as a voter they failed to participate in the decision making process. Leaving the past out, previous elections are handled and I believe people should leave those topics alone, its time to move along. Election day, November 7, 2006 has finally come and its time to cast your votes for Senate, the house and local representitives for various positions.
Tulsa, Oklahoma, where I reside definitely had their own fair share of issues, this morning when I arrived at my designated voting location, ballots were unavailable. It seems as though there are numerous scandalous situations occuring all across America. In the east, voters who were registered democrats were receiving telephone calls stating that their poll location had been moved. This was simply an oppurtunity to exploit peoples gullable intuitions and try to manipulate voting results.

Getting less democrats to the polls, less democratic votes, right? There is alot of talk across the blogosphere related to the elections. There have been numerous posts about political galloping, how many seats need to be won and the like. However, despite whatever the results turn out to be, our country will move forward. Personally, I don’t have many opinions about the elections this go-around. My only statement is that I am a democrat and I vote democrats all across. I believe that getting a majority in our legislature is important, however, will cause failure in the end.
The democratic party needs six seats in Senate and twenty four in the House to gain the majority. Think it’ll happen? What are your thoughts related to the outcome, see anything great coming out of it? Curious to know..
Early this year, a good friend Nick Switzer posted an article on his website related to the topic of informative voting.
“is he bazooka proof?â€
Obviously this doesn’t make that much sense since I did not tell you who it was, or exactly what the definition of bazooka proof. While I did have some people asking me who I was referring to, and some asking what exactly bazooka proof meant, I had others that simply answered without any hesitation. For about 8 hours I had this poll going, I had 7 people tell me that he was indeed bazooka proof, and 8 that said he was not.
Although I understand his point, I only disagree with his objective of the so-called “bazooka proof” theory. I believe that the information is out there, it takes research, opinions and observation to really dig in and understand. I monitor the media for various elements of information that I take into consideration when voting.
Nick’s approach of asking “bazooka proof” was slightly ridiculous. I am not even positive that I ended up answering his question or coming up with a statement to tackle it with. I remember asking numerous questions related to his two words, the rest is history. Difference being, bazooka proof meant what? I didn’t know, he didn’t know and I am pretty sure no one did. When it comes to voting, pay attention. There is so much information outlined in front of every single one of us for us to make an intelligent decision. Voting isn’t like playing the lottery, you’re not picking an official to jump into a position and hope he does great things.
If you pay attention to previous positions these men have held, women as well, their practices as individuals and morals, you will find answers to your questions. Are they spending a bunch of their time debating, campaigning their beliefs or bashing their opponents? Personally, I’m not a big fan of the egotistical jackasses that approach their opponents with verbal brutality and obvious negativity towards another’s beliefs. Then again, I am more so against the oversized blubber inticed elephants squeezing crap out onto their opponents in an attempt to cover for more important topics.
I feel the information is there, someone might not put it all in front of you — but its there. If I were to simply be given a piece of stationary and a pencil with six names to choose from, not knowing anything but their names and only because they were written on the paper — I wouldn’t vote. However, because I have been given the time, oppurtunity and freedom to research, discuss and decide who I feel is the best candidate to serve my country, I will do just that.
For those of you who don’t vote — I blame you. Your opinions matter and you’re lazy no matter what. If you feel you’re uninformed, get informed! If you believe no one is good enough to manage our country’s financial deficit, work on a degree in political science and scrutinize it when you are educated. Don’t squash on me for being a democrat and I won’t shit on you for being anything you are. Simply put — do something or shush!
[tags]politics, democrat, senate, oklahoma, tulsa, politician, vote, voting, poll[/tags]
Websites of Interest
[poll=3]
Nov 07
This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 7th, 2006 at 1:48 pmand is filed under everyday. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.The version of my website you are viewing is currently out of date. The content is still here as an archive and you are free to continue browsing it, however, I do recommend you check out my current homepage for more up to date information.
15 Comments Visit the Polls and Cast Your Vote
Justin
November 7th, 2006 at 2:00 pm
1Footnote: When politicians mention honesty, integrity, so-forth.. I personally just remember the whole fourteen year old page that they’re screwing with in the background. I am not referencing the crap that politicans END up doing from inforamtion, no one has any clue what they’re going to do once in office, when it comes to bad stuff… but for now — we have to go on what information we are given and make the best intelligent decisions we can.
When I bought my car, I didn’t know the check engine light would come up two weeks later — I simply made the best choice I could at the time.. if it works out — great 8)
jimmy
November 7th, 2006 at 2:10 pm
2you lost my interest at bazooka proof. :roll:
Scott
November 7th, 2006 at 2:37 pm
3Well, first off the “bazooka proof” Nick was talking about was simply an experiment. It showed that majority of people would simply vote based on their first impression, or on blind chance. It makes sense to me. Only an extremely small percentage of voters in his poll actually inquired as to what the question meant. The rest simply voted. I think he was trying to show how people do some ridiculous things…. such as voting one way “all across the board”.
Voting party based all the time is just ignorant. It shows that one does not vote based on their, yes… values, or what is important to them. They simply vote based on what party the person claims to be part of. If you blindly vote Republican or Democrat then you are not, in my opinion, a responsible voter. If you can say you voted all Democratic because the person you thought would be a better candidate just happened to be Democrat in every case, then that’s a totally different story.
But that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Justin
November 7th, 2006 at 4:20 pm
4@Scott: My definition of “Across the board” simply means, I vote democratic across the page. It has variations, but typically I agree with democratic views versus republican, ind. and liberals.
Nick’s experiment made sense — but I’m not sure that he justified why he doesn’t vote. Maybe the better question would be, “Why do you feel uninformed?”
That was my point in relation to his post. People who don’t ask questions or look stuff up are uninformed because they’re lazy. I remember Nick saying is he bazooka proof, and I asked a series of questions — not letting up at all.
When I asked Nick questions he said don’t worry about it and just answer. That was the turning point of his experiment. For those individuals who are not lazy and wanted to make a decision based on evidence, facts and information, Nick refused to deliver it. Therefore, his saying “Just answer” would force individuals into thinking, this must be some sort of silly joke he’s doing.
Therefore he would’ve recieved answers from individuals who in turn paid no attention. I don’t think his experiement accurately depicts voter information.
If Nick were to have given more information to those who inquired, maybe..
Are you agreeing then, Nick’s experiment is trying to prove that information is unavailable or refused to be delivered? I’ve never seen or heard of an instance where someone inquired about a politician and was “refused” to be given any information. Maybe not the information they wanted, but something in relation to their inquiry.
Politicans are some of the most criticised individuals in our country. I remember a friend telling me that as an assistant to a politician, she was asked numerous questions, “Anything in your history that could emberass our Mayor. Your parents, family members etc.”
My post isn’t to say Nick’s experiment was dumb. Its to disagree with people not voting. I think people should vote, all the resources are there, if you feel mis informed, get information. If you find yourself trying and not getting anywhere.. different story. Without trying though; I mean, seriously now.
Nick
November 7th, 2006 at 4:22 pm
5I was proving my point that you do need to research. People now a days say GO VOTE no matter what, which I believe is dumb. Sometimes people don’t want to research or have time to research because they are busy with other things (such as massive amount of homework and school research, such as what I am currently having to deal with). I was simply stating not to go vote because you can, but only if you have the information base your decision off of. Reckless voting for someone because they’re cool or because you have friends that voted for him/her is, in my mind, dumb. Might as well leave it to people that do know who/what they’re about than to have people just vote, because you may end up hating the results (such as the current situation with our president). I also believe just because someone says their a Democrat or Republican, doesn’t mean they should get your vote, but that’s another topic. So my theory of “Bazooka Proof” was meant to show that if you don’t know what people are talking about (as in you have no idea about people’s policies, etc) DO NOT VOTE, or research the information before casting your vote. (Most of what I’ve said was already explained by Scott, but I didn’t scroll all the way down and read his comment, sorry Scott).
Justin
November 7th, 2006 at 4:29 pm
6@Nick:
I based the comparison to your post strictly off the content provided on your site. You made a reference in the first paragraph of your article to why you didn’t vote. Then, you make a reference with the statement:
I guess I don’t get your point from your post — but now that you’ve explained it I guess I do.
Exchange some Monday night football for some senator election information :)
Nick
November 7th, 2006 at 5:31 pm
7I’ve been working on papers, working on homework, and do other things that are required, which I do not wish to state. I feel these are more important than looking at senator information for me as of right now. When I do have free time, I want to enjoy myself, which happened to be Monday Night Football. After that, I went back to researching for my paper that is coming up soon. My decision is to not spend my free time researching people because I would rather spend it doing something I enjoy. If I had plenty of free time, or if my work stopped when I came home, then may I could see how you could say that. But I don’t tell you how to spend your free time, so when I decide to watch MNF and enjoy my favorite football team, then you should understand that (especially when I don’t have all the free time I would like because I am busy). And yes I do remember you asking question about what “Bazooka proof” meant. But there were many people that did not, and “voted” based on nothing. That was my test. You were one of maybe two that asked questions, and me refusing to answer your questions were not because “Nick’s experiment is trying to prove that information is unavailable or refused to be delivered?”, it was because I didn’t have any information to give, and you were the only one that wanted it. It did start out to be “a silly joke” but then I took something else out of it because people were answering without any information or probing of information. Also, you say to research some Senators so I could vote instead of MNF, but according to you, I just need to like a party in order to vote. I don’t personally agree wtih this because different people have different views. They may not be extremely different from one another, but if one person decides that they are Pro-Choice and another Pro-Life, but I neglect to take this into consideration because he’s my party, then where does my information gathering matter? Maybe that is a subject that is not changed except per party, I don’t know. All I know is that when I vote, I want to do research before hand and review each person due to inconsistencies in people’s views throughout parties. If everyone in a party was the same, then why is it that multiple people from each party run against each other. With that being said, I am going to take the rest of my free time before I write this paper doing laundry, eating, and taking care of Maggie, instead of researching Senators, because that’s more important to me.
Scott
November 7th, 2006 at 5:47 pm
8@Justin
No one needs to justify to you why they don’t vote. It’s their choice, their freedom. You have the right to vote (unless you’re a convicted felon), but you also have the right NOT to vote. You also have the right NOT to explain yourself to anyone else.
Now, I agree with you that those who don’t vote should keep their mouths shut about the elected officials and how the government is being run. But at the same time, if they keep their mouths shut, and don’t vote, then it is their business.
Justin
November 7th, 2006 at 6:30 pm
9@Nick:
Whoa! Let’s slow down for a minute and actually re-read what was said.
Where did I tell you what to do with your free time in my initial comment stating MNF? If I did, let me know. I recall mentioning the exchange of time during MNF for senator research, didn’t say you should or you had to. But, if you so desired to research — so you could vote intelligently — the oppurtunity is there. The statement was not about you not doing something you should or doing something you shouldn’t simply that the oppurtunity exists. What you do with your time is your business.
I enjoy how you’re taking Scott’s approach, stating to vote for a party simply because they’re a party. However, I did clear that up in a previous comment, I thought I did at least..
@Scott:
Individuals can vote or not vote, it is their decision. I am not forcing anyone to discuss their rights, wants or opinions. I am simply soliciting the opinions of others via my blog..
its exactly what my website is for — interaction.
Read what I write as words, not as emotion — everyone!
Scott
November 7th, 2006 at 6:49 pm
10That was your reply to my post. Reading it as words, your wording is flawed. Voting “across the page” or “across the board” means voting one way all across the ballot. That insinuates that you do not take into account their views, simply their party.
That comment right there is where you used the wrong words again. And I never said you were forcing anyone to discuss their rights, I brought them up because of your statement. You said he did not justify why he didn’t vote. Maybe you meant he didn’t explain why he didn’t vote.
If that is the case, maybe I can help. The experiment made sense in showing that people do in fact vote without investigation. Now, obviously the poll isn’t exactly scientific because the vote doesn’t have heavy consequences like a political election does, but the premise is the same.
Nick
November 7th, 2006 at 7:15 pm
11Justin:
I may have taken it wrong, so I apologize. On the other hand, I do realize there is always time to do something, but I have other priorities that must come first, then after that, I try to do something fun. I wasn’t taking anyone’s approach. When you say “across the line” that means you vote Democrat no matter what. If this isn’t what you meant, then I understand. Also Big Ups to Justin for cutting his smoking in half. Seriously, that’s great.
Nathan
November 7th, 2006 at 9:39 pm
12Woooo Democrats. You certainly didn’t need to worry much about Democrats this cycle unless you live in Louisiana’s 2nd District.
I didn’t read “bazooka proof” or most of these comments, but the bottom line is if you don’t vote, don’t complain about potholes, the wages at your part-time job, the lack of federal grants for college, etc.
If you don’t inform yourself before voting, then don’t vote. You’re doing no one a favor by blindly voting.
That being said, I TOTALLY voted straight ticket Democrat on my absentee ballot. And it felt damn good.
Scott
November 8th, 2006 at 12:47 am
13Voting strictly Democrat or Republican is still blind voting in my opinion. Unless, as I said before, you did so because each Democrat or Republican happened to have the right stance on the issues that are important to you. If not, you’re just as bad as someone who knows nothing about the issues.
Justin
November 8th, 2006 at 12:52 am
14I only vote straight democrat if I agree with all the views, just so happens there has not been an instance when I didn’t vote all democrat… and yes — I voted Kerry :)
But you’ve always known that Scott. haha
Thanks for the comments Nathan, we won the house, only 3 more Senate seats open, but like I said before.. regardless its a failure for us Democrats in Senate.
Shane
November 8th, 2006 at 10:16 am
15Looks like America is going down the tube the next two years with the DFL in control…
RSS feed for comments on this post