Friday, August 17, 2012

The Stay-at-Homes

When I say when everybody votes, Democratic candidates win ...

When I say there are no swing voters, only Democratic voters who won't bother to turn out for repug-lite DINOs like Ben Cowardly Worm Chandler ...

When I say dems have to light a fire under the asses of Democratic voters ...

This is what I mean:
A nationwide USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll “of people who are eligible to vote but aren’t likely to do so finds that these stay-at-home Americans back Obama’s re-election over Republican Mitt Romney by more than 2-1.”


Victor said...

So, if you're rational and coherent enough not to answer that question by flipping a coin while the poller waits, you must understand that there's enough of a difference so that you made a choice - how do you not go out and vote?

After all of that, do you not understand the results of your inaction?

Did you learn nothing from 2001-2009, under Bush's epically disastrous "leadership?"

Or, is the lesson you learned that despite having 500,000 more votes, Gore still lost?
So who cares if you sit on your ass?

Well, the lesson I'd take is that if 500,000 wasn't enough, let me get my ass out there and vote, and convince others who agree with me to vote.

Your apathy, or lack of action, may result in another catastrophe.

And we can't afford another catastrophe.

Tom Hilton said...

Judging from the people in that article, I don't think "better" candidates would actually motivate them (Kentucky's particular situation aside). In fact, I'm hard-pressed to think of anything that would motivate people who acknowledge that it's important and necessary but just won't do it.

Philo Vaihinger said...

Any one of them would gladly bring, say, a million votes to the booths but, alas, each can bring only one.

And Romney will not win by one.