# One vote  makes no  difference



## z106 (12 Jun 2008)

I have never voted in my life and have no plans to change that in teh future.

My main reason being, I'm a firm believer in the mantra one vote makes no difference and have yet to find anyone to give me a rational argument to suggest to me that i am incorrect.

Anyone up for teh challenge ?

My logic is based on probability
i.e. the likelihood of my vote having any difference to the overall outcome is basically nil.

Given that it is such a slim probability then i am more than prepared to take my chances and continue to never vote.


----------



## rmelly (12 Jun 2008)

Probably best for the rest of us that you continue not voting...


----------



## z106 (12 Jun 2008)

well that's always the attitude - but try to fault my logic if you can.

It is faultless.


----------



## rmelly (12 Jun 2008)

Seriously, why would I want to bother? What's so important about your vote?


----------



## shanegl (12 Jun 2008)

Its all down to your personal preference. If you can't be bothered to participate in the democratic process and have your voice heard then so be it. If you want other people to make the decisions that you are unwilling to make for yourself go right ahead. If you feel that you don't want to exercise your democratic right to vote, a right that people have died to attain, a right that millions don't even have, fair enough.

One request though: When everyone else makes the decision for you, don't complain if you don't agree with it.


----------



## ninsaga (12 Jun 2008)

shame though- our forefathers fought so that we could vote - anyways shanegl made the point so don't complain


----------



## z106 (12 Jun 2008)

shanegl said:


> Its all down to your personal preference. If you can't be bothered to participate in the democratic process and have your voice heard then so be it. If you want other people to make the decisions that you are unwilling to make for yourself go right ahead. If you feel that you don't want to exercise your democratic right to vote, a right that people have died to attain, a right that millions don't even have, fair enough.
> 
> One request though: When everyone else makes the decision for you, don't complain if you don't agree with it.


 
I agree with you to a point.

However - it's not so much that i couldn't be bothered (although admittedy that is a large part of it) - but it's more of a probability issue.

The reality is that statistically speaking it's pretty much as good a nailed on certainty you'll ever find that 1 vote won't make the difference.

I'm coming at this from a mathematical angle.

It's just pointless. It will have zereo impact in teh end.


----------



## rmelly (12 Jun 2008)

shanegl, someone starting this thread less than an hour AFTER the polls close on one of the most contentious votes in recent history is clearly a troll, so I wouldn't bother...


----------



## z106 (12 Jun 2008)

rmelly said:


> shanegl, someone starting this thread less than an hour AFTER the polls close on one of the most contentious votes in recent history is clearly a troll, so I wouldn't bother...


 
A troll ? That's a good one.

All i'm saying is that my logic is correct.

People have been brainwashed through the years into thibking that anyone that has my viewpoint on teh topc is basically an idiot.

However - the reality is the logic lies with me for reasons i've outlined above.

And fact is fact - we all know that no one can dispute my logic.


----------



## rmelly (12 Jun 2008)

Oh sorry, I hadn't realised there was logic in there somewhere. Let me go back and see if I can find it...


----------



## shanegl (12 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> A troll ? That's a good one.
> 
> All i'm saying is that my logic is correct.
> 
> ...



Follow your logic through to its natural conclusion to see how absurd it is.


----------



## z106 (12 Jun 2008)

shanegl said:


> Follow your logic through to its natural conclusion to see how absurd it is.


 
Well why don't you do it for me.

That's why i'm posting the topic here.

Because for me I have followed it through to it's natural conclusion.

What else is there on it?

Unless you're referring to the old chestnut  "WHat if everyone thought like that" ? 

Well my response to that is, *in practice*, (and that is the important bit here), that would never happen.
And with tha in mind, for me to take it upon myself, while minding my own business and choosing not to vote will have *no impact whatsoever*.


----------



## so-crates (12 Jun 2008)

"logic" based on probability? Surely that is called gambling.

Anyway qwertyuiop go right ahead and not bother, by the same logic it makes my vote that tiny bit more valuable in the end!

Voting isn't about being the lynch-pin to every decision made, I have no delusions of such grandeur or pretensions to same. But when I am asked nicely for my opinion I feel it is both courteous and sensible that I respond. That I am not the only person being asked does not make me feel any less relevant or important.


----------



## z106 (12 Jun 2008)

so-crates said:


> "logic" based on probability? Surely that is called gambling.
> 
> Anyway qwertyuiop go right ahead and not bother, by the same logic it makes my vote that tiny bit more valuable in the end!
> 
> Voting isn't about being the lynch-pin to every decision made, I have no delusions of such grandeur or pretensions to same. But when I am asked nicely for my opinion I feel it is both courteous and sensible that I respond. That I am not the only person being asked does not make me feel any less relevant or important.


 
Well if you're voting out of courtesy then that's different.

I admire your courteous nature.

I'm just saying there is no incentive for me to get off the couch and vote because basically I can say with near certainty that it's gonna make absolutely no bit of difference to teh outcome in the end.


----------



## so-crates (12 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> I'm just saying there is no incentive for me to get off the couch and vote because basically I can say with near certainty that it's gonna make absolutely no bit of difference to teh outcome in the end.


 
Aw qwertyuiop, don't be sad, even if you don't change the outcome you still matter 

Why the fascination with being the one to make a difference?


----------



## rmelly (12 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop, are you on the register of electors? If so it seems a bit wasteful given the postage costs etc. if you never plan to vote. Any chance you'd take yourself off it please?


----------



## rmelly (12 Jun 2008)

so-crates said:


> Aw qwertyuiop, don't be sad, even if you don't change the outcome you still matter


 
Maybe I got it all wrong - maybe he's just lonely and wants a friend?


----------



## so-crates (13 Jun 2008)

nah, I'm reckoning he'd fancy being "Master of the Universe" that way ALL his votes would make a difference 
Who needs friends when you can have subjects!


----------



## z106 (13 Jun 2008)

so-crates said:


> Aw qwertyuiop, don't be sad, even if you don't change the outcome you still matter
> 
> Why the fascination with being the one to make a difference?


 
There's no fascination with it.

I am fascinated however how most people seem to overlook this glaringly obvious statistical fact.


----------



## gebbel (13 Jun 2008)

> One vote  makes no  difference



Not a very good reason to abstain from the democratic process. You can cite mathematical clap-trap all you want, but it's wasted on me so don't go there. Does your failure to vote also mean you don't bother to acquaint yourself with the issues? 



> well that's always the attitude - but try to fault my logic if you can.
> It is faultless.



Is that what you want your kids to believe?



> And with that in mind, for me to take it upon myself, while minding my own business and choosing not to vote will have *no impact whatsoever*



Yes it will, it will make most normal people think you are a jack-ass.


----------



## PM1234 (13 Jun 2008)

You have just gone from singular to plural. Did you mean to do that?


----------



## rmelly (13 Jun 2008)

so-crates said:


> nah, I'm reckoning he'd fancy being "Master of the Universe" that way ALL his votes would make a difference
> Who needs friends when you can have subjects!


 
yes, but would he bother voting?

I'm starting to think that maybe he has difficulties reading and writing and has concocted this 'theory' to avoid the shame of having to ask someone where he needs to put his X.

Don't worry qwertyuiop, there are organisations out there waiting to help you, and I am proud of you for admitting your problem, after all that's the first step to resolving the issue.


----------



## z106 (13 Jun 2008)

gebbel said:


> Not a very good reason to abstain from the democratic process. You can cite mathematical clap-trap all you want, but it's wasted on me so don't go there. Does your failure to vote also mean you don't bother to acquaint yourself with the issues?


 
I do in fact take a keen interest in the actual issues - i just don't vote.


----------



## shanegl (13 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> There's no fascination with it.
> 
> I am fascinated however how most people seem to overlook this glaringly obvious statistical fact.



They don't overlook it, they value the participation. Why do you think people attend protests, or sign petitions, donate small amounts to charity or even recycle?


----------



## z106 (13 Jun 2008)

Out of curiosity - WHat are your main reasons for voting?

I think we can all agree that teh difference betrween the winner and loser in an election being 1 vote is very slim -  so i'm presuming it's obvioulsy not that.

SO - what is it instead?

Is it because you get a feeliong of satisfaction in playing an active role in the democratic process?
Or is there some other reason that i'm not thinking of ?


----------



## z103 (13 Jun 2008)

> Its all down to your personal preference. If you can't be bothered to participate in the democratic process and have your voice heard then so be it. If you want other people to make the decisions that you are unwilling to make for yourself go right ahead. If you feel that you don't want to exercise your democratic right to vote, a right that people have died to attain, a right that millions don't even have, fair enough.


This is fair enough, but;



> One request though: When everyone else makes the decision for you, don't complain if you don't agree with it.


This makes no logical sense. The people that _did_ vote are the ones that have no business complaining! - They are the ones after all that 'made the decision'.


----------



## shanegl (13 Jun 2008)

I wasn't talking about people who vote, I was talking about someone who abdicates their right to vote. In what way does such a person have a right to complain?


----------



## z106 (13 Jun 2008)

I hear ye knockin' leghorn !

We might drill a bit of sense into them yet.


----------



## so-crates (13 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> i.e. the likelihood of *my vote* having any difference to the overall outcome is basically nil.


 


qwertyuiop said:


> And with tha in mind, for *me* to take it upon *myself,* while minding *my* own business and choosing not to vote will have *no impact whatsoever*.


 


qwertyuiop said:


> I'm just saying there is no incentive for *me* to get off the couch and vote because basically I can say with near certainty that it's gonna make absolutely no bit of difference to teh outcome in the end.


 
It's the personal pronoun thing, you seem very attached to the importance of your vote as a lynch-pin or decider, instead of your vote as a contributor. 



qwertyuiop said:


> .... but it's more of a probability issue.
> 
> The reality is that statistically speaking it's pretty much as good a nailed on certainty you'll ever find that 1 vote won't make the difference.
> 
> I'm coming at this from a mathematical angle.


hmmm, again this business of deriving "logic" from "statistics and probability". Statistics and probability are inherently uncertain, or rather certainty is a specific outcome where the probability is one and the statistical sample size is one. I think you are bandying words without actually providing the basis of your calculation.

In essence your argument is this. You vote, outcome closely mirrors the commercial and straw polls that were taken prior to the vote what was the point of your voting.

The problem with your argument is that you are treating a pre-vote searches for information as being relevant or important. They aren't. They don't count towards the result. What they do is reflect the actual sentiment of the sample population which can then be used to extrapolate what the result of the true poll will be (within a degree of certainty ... there is that word again...) 
If you didn't know beforehand what the universal sentiment was would your vote be as irrelevant to you?

The other thing to note in this country is the magnifying effect of proportional representation as a voting mechanism, this skews your simplistic interpretation of the "statistics" and gives rise to all those wonderful vote management strategies.

If you want to feel important though, just think about how much tarmacadam has been laid over the years chasing specific votes from specific people....


----------



## so-crates (13 Jun 2008)

rmelly said:


> yes, but would he bother voting?


Given that his contention is based on "statistics" and probability he would have to bow to the maths and vote. A population of 1 produces certainty which would mean that his vote would count, worth getting off the couch for!


----------



## z106 (13 Jun 2008)

so-crates said:


> I think you are bandying words without actually providing the basis of your calculation.


 
The basis of my calculation is very simple - the greater the number of peopel voting, the less imoact any one vote has.

So - if only 3 peopel were allowed vote and i was one of those 3 then i would most definitely vote.

When you're talking about the  number of potential voters being ion teh millions then my 1 vote loses value.

In fact - it loses so much value to the point of being near redundant.

And my point has nothing do with straw polls before elections as you have mentioned.


----------



## so-crates (13 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> I think we can all agree that teh difference betrween the winner and loser in an election being 1 vote is very slim - so i'm presuming it's obvioulsy not that.


 
Hmm, again the fascination with the lynchpin vote. I assume you want to be the piece of paper that was the last one counted?


----------



## z106 (13 Jun 2008)

so-crates said:


> Hmm, again the fascination with the lynchpin vote. I assume you want to be the piece of paper that was the last one counted?


 
I suppose my question is this.

What do you get out of it in going to the trouble of going down to the polling station given that your one vote,in all likelihood, will have no bearing whatsoever on the outcome?


----------



## so-crates (13 Jun 2008)

The fundamental difference between you and those who vote then qwertyuiop is not their fascination with democracy or ignorance of statistics. The fundamental difference is that my one vote (ignoring for a moment PR) has a value of 1, your vote has a value of 1/1000000. So again it comes down to a fascination you have with the importance of your vote.


----------



## shanegl (13 Jun 2008)

Well said.


----------



## z106 (13 Jun 2008)

so-crates said:


> The fundamental difference between you and those who vote then qwertyuiop is not their fascination with democracy or ignorance of statistics. The fundamental difference is that my one vote (ignoring for a moment PR) has a value of 1, your vote has a value of 1/1000000. So again it comes down to a fascination you have with the importance of your vote.


 
Your point makes no sense.

Your vote may well have a value of 1.
But when that one is one of a million or so,in relative terms, it is near worthless.

And that is the important point whcih you seem to ignore.


----------



## so-crates (13 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> I suppose my question is this.
> 
> What do you get out of it in going to the trouble of going down to the polling station given that your one vote,in all likelihood, will have no bearing whatsoever on the outcome?


 
What do I get out of it? Hmm, not being one given to bribes I tend to try avoid getting anything out of it at all.

How do I value the right and opportunity to vote? I would concur with shanegl, not only do I have a vote but that vote was gained by the efforts of those who had none, this indicates in the first instance that vote has intrinsic value. 
I vote because my relevance is not tied into the herd but is intrinsic in who I am. I vote to express my opinion, irrespective of how many people it aligns with. I vote because my opinion is canvassed. I vote because it is a civic responsibility. I vote because I matter. You don't because you don't matter enough.


----------



## z106 (13 Jun 2008)

And it has nothing to do with teh importance of *my* vote like you seem to think.

The point i am making is a general one and about the importance of *any* one single vote.(WHich obviously does include my one vote as well as any other one vote)


----------



## shanegl (13 Jun 2008)

His vote isn't worthless to him though, that's the point you can't grasp.


----------



## so-crates (13 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> Your point makes no sense.
> 
> Your vote may well have a value of 1.
> But when that one is one of a million or so,in relative terms, it is near worthless.
> ...


 
That is the difference between absolute value and relative value. 
I look at intrinsic, absolute value, you look at relative. I do not ignore, I comprehend.


----------



## z106 (13 Jun 2008)

so-crates said:


> What do I get out of it? Hmm, not being one given to bribes I tend to try avoid getting anything out of it at all.
> 
> How do I value the right and opportunity to vote? I would concur with shanegl, not only do I have a vote but that vote was gained by the efforts of those who had none, this indicates in the first instance that vote has intrinsic value.
> I vote because my relevance is not tied into the herd but is intrinsic in who I am. I vote to express my opinion, irrespective of how many people it aligns with. I vote because my opinion is canvassed. I vote because it is a civic responsibility. I vote because I matter. You don't because you don't matter enough.


 
Ok - so in a nutshell what you are saying is that you vote because you get a certain satisfaction out of partaking in teh whole thing.

That's fair enough.

I would be surprised though if everyone that votes also get this overwhelming feeling fo satisfaction of voting because our fporefathers died and all that.

Most peopel i reckon do it because they are sheep. 
If they stood back for a second they would quickly realise it will have no impact.

They've been told to ridicule the man who says one vote makes no difference.


----------



## so-crates (13 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> And it has nothing to do with teh importance of *my* vote like you seem to think.
> 
> The point i am making is a general one and about the importance of *any* one single vote.(WHich obviously does include my one vote as well as any other one vote)


 
You refer repeatedly to your own vote, the inference isn't too arduous to draw.

Other votes are immaterial to you, you cannot cast them. The only vote you should be worrying about is that one little vote that you have. On a lighter note, haven't you ever read Terry Pratchett?


----------



## z106 (13 Jun 2008)

so-crates said:


> You refer repeatedly to your own vote, the inference isn't too arduous to draw.
> 
> Other votes are immaterial to you, you cannot cast them. The only vote you should be worrying about is that one little vote that you have. On a lighter note, haven't you ever read Terry Pratchett?


 

No - i've never read terry pratchett. Why ?


----------



## shanegl (13 Jun 2008)

> Most peopel i reckon do it because they are sheep.
> If they stood back for a second they would quickly realise it will have no impact.



It must keep you awake at night knowing that there's literally hundreds of thousands of incredibly stupid people out there getting incredible kicks from things you will never know, while deciding your fate.


----------



## z106 (13 Jun 2008)

shanegl said:


> It must keep you awake at night knowing that there's literally hundreds of thousands of incredibly stupid people out there getting incredible kicks from things you will never know, while deciding your fate.


 
I'd say the kicks of having to negotiate traffic etc. to cast a vote that will have no impact are pretty small.


----------



## shanegl (13 Jun 2008)

Don't knock till you've tried it.


----------



## so-crates (13 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> Ok - so in a nutshell what you are saying is that you vote because you get a certain satisfaction out of partaking in teh whole thing.
> 
> That's fair enough.


Actually no, that was not what I said at all. Satisfaction is immaterial in voting, why would it be of any relevance? I referred to the evidence of value shown by the campaigns of individuals to obtain voting rights, the necessities of citizenship and the common courtesy of answering a question you are asked. Satisfaction was mentioned nowhere in what I said, you are ascribing to me motives I did not detail.



qwertyuiop said:


> I would be surprised though if everyone that votes also get this overwhelming feeling fo satisfaction of voting because our fporefathers died and all that.


 
What a silly statement! I never referred to dying forbears, I referred to active, civic forbears who campaigned for the vote to be made available to people without property or were of the wrong colour, or of the wrong religion or the wrong gender, etc. The vast majority of whom are dead but generally as a result of normal means.



qwertyuiop said:


> Most peopel i reckon do it because they are sheep.
> If they stood back for a second they would quickly realise it will have no impact.
> 
> They've been told to ridicule the man who says one vote makes no difference.


 
So in other words, you despise those who chose to vote and ridicule the value they place on it? Anyone who votes has to register to vote then haul their arses off the couch, go to the polling station and place their mark for ephemeral posterity. Sheep aren't noted for either that competence or direction. I think you have a little bit of a sulk on there. You have decided your vote only matters if you can influence the outcome directly and visibly (hence the reason you would vote in a triumvirate) so in other words it is importance you seek not relevance.


----------



## so-crates (13 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> No - i've never read terry pratchett. Why ?


 
Just your reference to 1 in a million made me smile. As the wizards of the Unseen University are fond of saying 1-in-a-million chances come up nine times out of ten.


----------



## so-crates (13 Jun 2008)

shanegl said:


> It must keep you awake at night knowing that there's literally hundreds of thousands of incredibly stupid people out there getting incredible kicks from things you will never know, while deciding your fate.


 
And he's keeping us awake with him shanegl! I reckon I am going to hit the leaba and leave him to ruminate on the pointlessness of washing cos you only get dirty again


----------



## z106 (13 Jun 2008)

so-crates said:


> so in other words it is importance you seek not relevance.


 
Quite the opposite in fact - wih a million voters my 1 vote becomes irrelevant and therefore not worth the hassle of hauling my ass down to teh polling station.

Then again - you could say importance and relevance are related in that if my vote was relevant (say in a poll of 3) then my vote would be important.

But teh overriding thing i would be  seeking is relevance.


----------



## shanegl (13 Jun 2008)

so-crates said:


> And he's keeping us awake with him shanegl! I reckon I am going to hit the leaba and leave him to ruminate on the pointlessness of washing cos you only get dirty again





Sounds good, I think I'll head too, money to be made on the morrow. Probably no point though, I'll only spend it.


----------



## Yoltan (13 Jun 2008)

Is this guy for real?? "I won't vote because _MY_ 1 vote won't make a difference blah blah blah.....!!" What do you want us to say?? Get a life!


----------



## NicolaM (13 Jun 2008)

Yoltan said:


> Is this guy for real?? "I won't vote because _MY_ 1 vote won't make a difference blah blah blah.....!!" What do you want us to say?? Get a life!


Well, _this is_ called letting off steam Yoltan! It's ok to have opinions that _you or others_ don't personally agree with, without being told to get a life 
Nicola


----------



## Ceist Beag (13 Jun 2008)

What a ridiculous thread. qwertyuiop good luck with yerself, hope everything works out for ye and that yer opinion continues to remain unheard if that's what you so wish.


----------



## diarmuidc (13 Jun 2008)

I don't subscribe to his view but Carlin is pretty funny regardless.


----------



## Berni (13 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> No - i've never read terry pratchett. Why ?


 
You'd like the (benevolent) dictator of the main city state - he believes in the "One man, one vote" system.  He is the one man, and he has the one vote.


----------



## room305 (13 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> I think we can all agree that teh difference betrween the winner and loser in an election being 1 vote is very slim - so i'm presuming it's obvioulsy not that.


 
I find that having to vote (I view it as a civic responsibility - up there with not littering or obeying traffic laws and the like) concentrates my mind on the issue at hand. Since in the run up to vote I study the issues involved it would seem strange not to vote at the end of it. Like fervently reading the pre-match reports but opting not to bother actually watching the match as "it will make no difference".

If it helps I find that my vote will often carry ten or more "proxy votes" as many friends and family will ask me what way they "should vote" (i.e. what way am I going to vote and why).

As a hypothetical question, if we were to take the most recent Lisbon Treaty referendum, and I told you I would gladly give you €1 million if it passed, would you still opt not to vote on the same basis as you have already outlined?


----------



## bullbars (13 Jun 2008)

shanegl said:


> One request though: When everyone else makes the decision for you, don't complain if you don't agree with it.


 
Agree 100%.


----------



## davidoco (13 Jun 2008)

[broken link removed] and a good example would be 

On November 8, 1923, members of the then recently -- formed revolutionary political party met to elect a leader in a Munich, Germany beer hall. By a majority of *one vote* they chose an ex-soldier named Adolph Hitler to become the Nazi Party leader. 

or closer to home 

In the 2002 General Election in Cork South-Central, Kathy Sinnott(Ind) lost by 6 votes to John Dennehy (FF) on the 10th count.
In the same General Election in Limerick West Dan Neville won by one Vote and Michael Finucane lost by one Vote


----------



## csirl (13 Jun 2008)

> Quite the opposite in fact - wih a million voters my 1 vote becomes irrelevant and therefore not worth the hassle of hauling my ass down to teh polling station.


 
Yeah, but if say 500,000 people have your attitude it makes a huge difference to the outcome of an election or referendum. So you trying to persuade the populus that they should adopt your attitude does have an impact if people start agreeing with you.


----------



## orka (13 Jun 2008)

davidoco said:


> [broken link removed] and a good example would be
> 
> ..


 
Surprisingly this Florida state link doesn't mention one of the most significant close votes of recent times on their own doorstep - when GWB 'beat' Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election - remember the debacle of the hanging chads and pregnant chads and dimpled chads?  I bet there are a lot of people in Florida who regret having sat on their asses on the couch that day - just think what they could have spared themselves and the world...


----------



## Blossy (13 Jun 2008)

i agree with those that said this thread is ridiculus, people died for our right to vote, i think to solve this issue the OP should be sent to a country where the people have no say whatsover as to what happens in thier country and he wont be long wishing he had his vote back to make a change.


----------



## truthseeker (13 Jun 2008)

For those people interested in why one vote makes a difference have a look at this paper:
[broken link removed]

OP - I reckon you have a huge fundamental flaw in your logic. You seem to be missing the point that each and every persons vote carries the same weight and its the sum of the parts thats important. If everyone thought as you did it would make a huge difference! Examples have already been given in this thread where 1 vote did actually make the difference. Read the paper linked to above and see what you think.


----------



## tallpaul (13 Jun 2008)

Given that today's results tell us that there were only 4 votes in favour of the Yes side in Carlow-Kilkenny, it makes all of the OP's arguments moot...

Also I recall several TD's that have been elected with margins of less than five votes, so yes everyone's vote does count, whether it is expressed oor not.


----------



## so-crates (13 Jun 2008)

tallpaul said:


> Given that today's results tell us that there were only 4 votes in favour of the Yes side in Carlow-Kilkenny, it makes all of the OP's arguments moot...
> 
> Also I recall several TD's that have been elected with margins of less than five votes, so yes everyone's vote does count, whether it is expressed oor not.


 
Darn, you beat me to it tallpaul 

Although I can imagine the OP's logic will be that on a national scale the difference is greater, I entirely agree with what you are saying here, as I pointed out in an earlier aside, PR magnifies votes and frequently gives rise to close contests.


----------



## room305 (14 Jun 2008)

orka said:


> Surprisingly this Florida state link doesn't mention one of the most significant close votes of recent times on their own doorstep - when GWB 'beat' Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election - remember the debacle of the hanging chads and pregnant chads and dimpled chads? I bet there are a lot of people in Florida who regret having sat on their asses on the couch that day - just think what they could have spared themselves and the world...


 
.


----------



## Complainer (15 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> I have never voted in my life and have no plans to change that in teh future.
> 
> My main reason being, I'm a firm believer in the mantra one vote makes no difference and have yet to find anyone to give me a rational argument to suggest to me that i am incorrect.
> 
> ...


Is it safe to assume that you never clap or cheer at a match or a gig - right? One more clapper makes no difference.


And you make no effort to conserve energy/paper - right? Because the savings of one individual make no difference.


----------



## rmelly (15 Jun 2008)

Complainer said:


> And you make no effort to conserve energy/paper - right? Because the savings of one individual make no difference.


 
You may have a point there - why am I bothering recycling?


----------



## justsally (15 Jun 2008)

Better to light one candle than to curse the darkness 

_        old chinese proberb_


----------



## rmelly (15 Jun 2008)

justsally said:


> Better to light one candle than to curse the darkness
> 
> _old chinese proberb_


 
what if that one candle falls over and burns your house down?


----------



## DavyJones (15 Jun 2008)

rmelly said:


> You may have a point there - why am I bothering recycling?


 

I think most people recycle to save money, nothing to do with enviroment. If we could just make it so voting saves us money................................


----------



## rmelly (15 Jun 2008)

DavyJones said:


> I think most people recycle to save money, nothing to do with enviroment. If we could just make it so voting saves us money................................


 
I live in an apartment block, so pay fixed charge (via management fees) regardless of how much or little I  put in rubbish bin versus recycling.


----------



## z106 (18 Jun 2008)

All i am saying is this.

The likelihood of one vote being the difference between the swing between one way or the other is literally many thousands-to-one.

From a statistical viewpoint, With those knd of odds, I am very comfortable in not bothering in voting - because it will very likely have no impact.

These are the stats people.

I know some people who travel the length and breadth of the country to cast their vote.
Taking the obvious point that they haven't bothered to transfer their vote aside, I can't help thinlung these peopel are absolute idiots.
And what really bugs me is that they seem to take a perverse sense of pride in this and expect huge pats on the back for this.

like - it certainly ain't worth that !

Lets be honest here - if,say, all of you had to travel,say, a 3 hour round trip to vote, then would you do it?

I'm suspecting most of you would not.

In fact what i'm really saying is this - it's all a trade off.

Is the likelihood of a many-thousand-to-one shot coming in worth the effort of me hauling myself down to the polluing station, then statistically i think anyojne would be mad to do so.
However - if the ballot bvox appeared in my living room then yes, I probably would vote.

In fact - my original point of one vote not making a difference can, in fact, lead up to a broader point - of effort versus likelihood of impact - where voting is a good example in my book.
i.e. is the likelihood of any action. given the effort involved woth the trade off/effort ?

And as for anyone who says - "What if everyone thoght that" - then yes - that may well make a dfferenece.
Well of course if many people thought that then it would make a difference.
But you peopel have a very imoortant word in ur argument with the word "if"
i.e.you are on about a hypothetical situation - i am not !
i.e. this thread aside, if i try to keep my head down and attempt to infliuence no one else about voting then, in reality, it will have pretty much zero impact

And for those of you that point to history where 1 vore was the difference,al i will say there is hat yes, statistically it can happen.
However it is very unlikely.

And that's a gamble i am prepared to take.

And in fact - don't forget that in those instances the likes of me may have voted to make the swing a difference of 2 as opposed to zero !

q.e.d.


----------



## cole (18 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> I know some people who travel the length and breadth of the country to cast their vote.
> Taking the obvious point that they haven't bothered to transfer their vote aside, I can't help thinlung these peopel are absolute idiots.
> And what really bugs me is that they seem to take a perverse sense of pride in this and expect huge pats on the back for this.
> 
> like - it certainly ain't worth that !


 
Like - it certainly is. Many students live away from home and may not transfer their vote as they are in different lodgings each year. Often people can be away from home for a variety of reasons e.g. business, training etc. And you call them idiots for returning home to cast their vote?



qwertyuiop said:


> Lets be honest here - if,say, all of you had to travel,say, a 3 hour round trip to vote, then would you do it?


 
I travelled a 4 hour _one way_ trip in order to cast my vote.



qwertyuiop said:


> Is the likelihood of a many-thousand-to-one shot coming in worth the effort of me hauling myself down to the polluing station, then statistically i think anyojne would be mad to do so.
> However - if the ballot bvox appeared in my living room then yes, I probably would vote.


 
Says it all really.


----------



## room305 (18 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> All i am saying is this.
> 
> The likelihood of one vote being the difference between the swing between one way or the other is literally many thousands-to-one.
> 
> From a statistical viewpoint, With those knd of odds, I am very comfortable in not bothering in voting - because it will very likely have no impact.


 
You still didn't answer my question:



room305 said:


> As a hypothetical question, if we were to take the most recent Lisbon Treaty referendum, and I told you I would gladly give you €1 million if it passed, would you still opt not to vote on the same basis as you have already outlined?


----------



## so-crates (18 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> All i am saying is this.
> 
> The likelihood of one vote being the difference between the swing between one way or the other is literally many thousands-to-one.
> 
> ...


Once again qwertyuiop you demonstrate that you only value your vote where it is individually important or decisive. The simple truth is, *you don't value your vote*.
We are none of us fools, we are quite capable of looking at the mathematics of the situation, I suspect some are possibly more capable than others but chance is a game we play from early childhood and of all the mathematical disciplines it is the one we exercise most. We choose to vote on the basis that it is both a right and a duty, not on the basis that our individual votes carry the weight of the nation's future. We choose to participate. You choose not to. Don't expect congratulations for finding a weak argument to justify sloth.




qwertyuiop said:


> q.e.d.


Quod Erat Demonstratum? .... But nobody asked, you volunteered.


----------



## Gunnerbar (18 Jun 2008)

qwertyuiop said:


> And as for anyone who says - "What if everyone thoght that" - then yes - that may well make a dfferenece.
> Well of course if many people thought that then it would make a difference.....



47% of people didn't vote for one reason or another!




qwertyuiop said:


> But you peopel have a very imoortant word in ur argument with the word "if"
> i.e.you are on about a hypothetical situation - i am not !
> i.e. this thread aside, if i try to keep my head down and attempt to infliuence no one else about voting then, in reality, it will have pretty much zero impact.....



Well actually no, it's not hypothethetical. I don't think there has ever been a 100% turnout. Take the last referendum. 47% did what you did and didn't show. If, shall we say, you changed your mind then it would follow that maybe 10 - 20 % of people (say) would/could change their minds and vote. OK that's a bit out there I admit but that seems to me how trends workespecially in mechanisms such as referendums. That's a hell of a swing. So you see it wouldnt be just you who changed their mind but thousands like you (ie you're in the same boat as 47% of the voting population).


----------



## Sn@kebite (19 Jun 2008)

An old Roman town's wells and Aqueduct were running bone dry after a drought. The town held a meeting and all agreed to pour one barrel of red wine into the aqueduct to have running wine instead of water. However, one selfish roman said to himself "Oh well, if I don't pour my wine in then that means I will get to keep all my barrels and have more free wine"...

The next day he excitedly ran outside to get some wine; the aqueduct was completely bone dry...


----------



## shootingstar (21 Jun 2008)

just to throw in my tuppence worth.... i wanted to vote. was gona vote... but got too tired after work to drive the hour... i dont think my vote would have been the be-all and end-all to the election. it would have just added a notch to the side that i was voting on... which now looking at the stats would have made very little difference... 

I'd be more curious as to why people made their decisions (Y or N) based on what? I tried reading it and i couldnt make head nor tail of ALOT of it. so i spoke with my father who is one of the most intelligent men i know (hes too bloody knowledgeable) and he advised me what i should do, and that made my decision for me. But i suppose afterwards it didnt matter as i put down a crap day in work and headed home to my hubby-to-be with a bottle of wine... instead of doing the hours drive.


----------

