People who don't vote should shut up about politics

[skitzee2k]

I still maintain it should be an obligation to vote, but only if there is a non of the above box.

What happens if non of the above get a majority is a whole different question

I guess the same as if they don't bother voting.

Someone has to run the country. If you can't find anyone to vote for you either have not looked properly, there is almost someone out there for everyones views...or should think about standing yourself.

 

[lifesagasman]

schizo, don't you understand the stupidity of what you are saying?
in essence you are saying that if you don't vote you should 'shut up', i.e. voice no opinion, because to do so as a non-participant means you are a hypocrite.
so, as an example, on the paedophile/forces thread you had so much to say, i.e. you voiced your opinions. well, since we established that you are not in the forces, does that mean that you are a paedo? you are saying that you must be a participant in order to have a valid opinion, so logic requires that that assumption must be true, otherwise you become a hypocrite, which is something you decry.
utterly twisted logic, of course, but you do seem to want to have your cake and eat it. you come on here with opinions about everything, even things which you are no part of, which is what people who don't vote can also have, regardless of whether you 'approve ' or not.
get real.

 

[Homesafe]

schizo, don't you understand the stupidity of what you are saying?
in essence you are saying that if you don't vote you should 'shut up', i.e. voice no opinion, because to do so as a non-participant means you are a hypocrite.
so, as an example, on the paedophile/forces thread you had so much to say, i.e. you voiced your opinions. well, since we established that you are not in the forces, does that mean that you are a paedo? you are saying that you must be a participant in order to have a valid opinion, so logic requires that that assumption must be true, otherwise you become a hypocrite, which is something you decry.
utterly twisted logic, of course, but you do seem to want to have your cake and eat it. you come on here with opinions about everything, even things which you are no part of, which is what people who don't vote can also have, regardless of whether you 'approve ' or not.
get real.

I might regret this , but I agree for once with putto

 

[lifesagasman]

schizo, don't you understand the stupidity of what you are saying?
in essence you are saying that if you don't vote you should 'shut up', i.e. voice no opinion, because to do so as a non-participant means you are a hypocrite.
so, as an example, on the paedophile/forces thread you had so much to say, i.e. you voiced your opinions. well, since we established that you are not in the forces, does that mean that you are a paedo? you are saying that you must be a participant in order to have a valid opinion, so logic requires that that assumption must be true, otherwise you become a hypocrite, which is something you decry.
utterly twisted logic, of course, but you do seem to want to have your cake and eat it. you come on here with opinions about everything, even things which you are no part of, which is what people who don't vote can also have, regardless of whether you 'approve ' or not.
get real.

I might regret this , but I agree for once with putto

get away... you've agreed with me loads, you're just playing hard to get....no hard feelings, now......

 

[skitzee2k]

schizo, don't you understand the stupidity of what you are saying?
in essence you are saying that if you don't vote you should 'shut up', i.e. voice no opinion, because to do so as a non-participant means you are a hypocrite.
so, as an example, on the paedophile/forces thread you had so much to say, i.e. you voiced your opinions. well, since we established that you are not in the forces, does that mean that you are a paedo? you are saying that you must be a participant in order to have a valid opinion, so logic requires that that assumption must be true, otherwise you become a hypocrite, which is something you decry.
utterly twisted logic, of course, but you do seem to want to have your cake and eat it. you come on here with opinions about everything, even things which you are no part of, which is what people who don't vote can also have, regardless of whether you 'approve ' or not.
get real.

I will repeat in small sentences so even you can understand.

If you are asked for your opinion (asked to vote) and you REFUSE to give your opinion when it matters, it is dumb to then go on about your opinion when it doesn't matter.

I am NOT saying you have to be a participant on something before you can give your opinion, what I am saying is if you refuse to give your opinion, if asked, at the time the decisions are made, it is pointless to give them when it is too late to change anything.

"What drink do you want?"
"Not telling you"
"why?"
"just not"
"ok...well, i'll have the coke which leaves you the pepsi"
"Oh that's it!! Always taking the one drink i like, you bastard!!"

 

[lifesagasman]

get real.

I will repeat in small sentences so even you can understand.

If you are asked for your opinion (asked to vote) and you REFUSE to give your opinion when it matters, it is dumb to then go on about your opinion when it doesn't matter.

I am NOT saying you have to be a participant on something before you can give your opinion, what I am saying is if you refuse to give your opinion, if asked, at the time the decisions are made, it is pointless to give them when it is too late to change anything.

"What drink do you want?"
"Not telling you"
"why?"
"just not"
"ok...well, i'll have the coke which leaves you the pepsi"
"Oh that's it!! Always taking the one drink i like, you b*****d!!"

you're a lost cause

 

[skitzee2k]

get real.

I will repeat in small sentences so even you can understand.

If you are asked for your opinion (asked to vote) and you REFUSE to give your opinion when it matters, it is dumb to then go on about your opinion when it doesn't matter.

I am NOT saying you have to be a participant on something before you can give your opinion, what I am saying is if you refuse to give your opinion, if asked, at the time the decisions are made, it is pointless to give them when it is too late to change anything.

"What drink do you want?"
"Not telling you"
"why?"
"just not"
"ok...well, i'll have the coke which leaves you the pepsi"
"Oh that's it!! Always taking the one drink i like, you b*****d!!"

you're a lost cause

Can't find flaws in my argument now i take it..why don't you just invent a flaw like normal??

 

[lifesagasman]

i don't need to invent flaws, you provide them all.

 

[skitzee2k]

i don't need to invent flaws, you provide them all.

...but let me guess, you 'can't be bothered' to point them out

That is a school yard trick gas, and it didn't even work then. Everyone knows that actually translates as "I haven't got a response...so i better pretend I just can't be bothered".

 

[EddieM]

Why is voting non of the above not giving an opinion, it's a valid as anything else?

 

[skitzee2k]

Why is voting non of the above not giving an opinion, it's a valid as anything else?

because it doesn't actually answer the question "who should be in government?"

If the question that we were trying to find the answer to was "who SHOULDN'T be in government" then yeah it would work, but the country NEEDS a government, so they would just go with whatever candidate had the most votes...so your vote in affect would count for nothing.

 

[lifesagasman]

i don't need to invent flaws, you provide them all.

...but let me guess, you 'can't be bothered' to point them out

That is a school yard trick gas, and it didn't even work then. Everyone knows that actually translates as "I haven't got a response...so i better pretend I just can't be bothered".

No, really, i just can't be bothered...

 

[EddieM]

Why is voting non of the above not giving an opinion, it's a valid as anything else?

because it doesn't actually answer the question "who should be in government?"

If the question that we were trying to find the answer to was "who SHOULDN'T be in government" then yeah it would work, but the country NEEDS a government, so they would just go with whatever candidate had the most votes...so your vote in affect would count for nothing.

It answers the question perfectly, non of the above. Have another think, come up with something I am prepared to vote for. "You NEED a government?" do you?

 

[oompah]

Hypothetical scenario:
Labour win an election by 20,000 votes and gain power.
That night up and down the country there are a total of 21,000 Tory voters who didn't bother to vote.
If they had voted their party would have won.

Using that scenario by not voting you have influenced the result so you're entitled to a view and voice it.

 

[EddieM]

Perhaps people who do vote (for the successful party) should shut up, after all you got what you asked for. (oh hang on how many voted for Gordon Brown as PM?)