Not Voting and Cross Over…

I am having an ongoing debate with a co-worker about her (him) not voting and my cross over vote.

Here are the pertinent parts of our many e-mails…you decide if my co-worker has a point.

Why my co-worker did not vote:

“I'm not voting for Hillary, because I'm not convinced she is the most beatable candidate and I think it's wrong and immoral.

I'm not voting for McCain, because I don't support him, yet, and I want him to know that.

I'm not voting for Huckabee, because although he is my favorite candidate and I support him, I do not want to increase the Republican base that is voting. I want Republican voter turnout to be low (which it may likely be due to those voting for Clinton anyways). So, perhaps my choice is more diluted because of that reason. Yet, my mind is made up.

Therefore, my vote is not to vote, because I want to make a point to McCain that he needs to think long and hard about his next steps if he wants the Republican base to support him. I want him to know that I'd rather not vote at all than to vote for him if he stays the current course. Maybe a vote for Huckabee does that, but I don't think so. I think a vote for Huckabee shows that I'm going to vote Republican no matter what; whereas; a no-vote says... maybe not so much.”

What (s)he thinks of me (and any of you) for voting for Hillary (that still leaves a nasty taste in my mouth…ugh!!!):

"Once again - not voting is more of a civic duty than tampering with the election. The founding Fathers would be turning in their graves if they knew people were casting dishonest votes - they should all be ashamed of themselves and should have no say about the state of politics or what policies are originating out of Washington since they consciously tampered with an election bringing down the respect of America to that of a 3rd world country
- Good Job!"


"There is no difference between not voting and voting for a candidate you don't want to win. None. Except one is a bit more honorable. You can say it's not tampering, but we all know it is, no matter what shade of gray you want to call it. It was an immoral thing to do and shame on you!"

So what say all of you?

Is staying home because your guy has no chance of winning sending a message to the winner?

Would the founding fathers be proud of my co-worker for sitting on his(her) hands and not voting?

Is voting in an open primary in Wisconsin tantamount to “tampering” with an election?

Is it more “honorable” to stay home and not vote?

How do all of you that crossed over feel about your “immoral” act?

3 comments to "Not Voting and Cross Over…"

  • I do believe it is the choice of that person to vote or not to vote! It would be immoral for that person to vote for someone who they do not want to win then to just stay home!

    Letting down our fathers? NO

    I do believe that put in place an option to vote or not to vote! SO..

  • Its an open primary and therefore not tampering to "cross over", and I refuse to accept this immoral charge.
    I personally think that the founders of this country and every one who has ever died to ensure our right, and responsibility, to vote would be mad as hell at this idea of sitting at home somehow being more honorable than voting for someone you don't want to win.

  • The system is Broken!
    I believe the ballots are "fixed" by the (s)electronic voting machines
    the (S)electoral college decides who wins, not the popular vote!

    So tell me why I should go to the poles?
    All it will do is get me put on a list for Jury duty!

gopfolk's shared items

Shared Science News

Blog Archive


Web hosting for webmasters