Voter Registration Campaigns

Kerry

 

To sum up recent posts from my Republican brothers:

1. We give up our rights so that terrorists don't take them.
2. Criticism of government is treason.
3. Peaceful protest is wrong if it causes inconvenience.
4. Voting is wrong if you're not the "right" kind of citizen.

I'm sure Thomas Jefferson would be proud.

 

I've been involved in several GOTV (get out the vote) campaigns. They almost always target minorities and the impoverished because they are usually not registered.

The thought that some of you would prefer some stay home is really kinda scary but not too surprising. Ironically, the most fervent on both sides of the political spectrum are the scariest voters, not the people in the middle.

The truth is that 90 percent of Americans are un-educated voters. Of the remaining 10 percent, only about half of them are open and well-informed enough to choose the BEST candidate for the job regardless of party or ideological affiliation.

To be an educated voter means to look with an un-biased eye at all the issues facing a potential candidate and decide. I ask myself these four questions about every candidate...

1. Who would do the best job if elected?
2. Who most reflects my personal ideology and philosophy?
3. Who would have the greatest chance of success (or least chance of failure)?
4. Who would best represent my district/state/country, etc?

Sometimes, someone who differs from me ideologically actually has the best chance of succeeding in the job compared to the opponent, so I have to take that into account.

The reality is that the vast majority of people are too blinded by their loyalties and unwillingness to really look deeply at all the issues and candidates to make a truly educated decision in the voting booth. And, even if they were more open to candidates of other affiliations, they aren't educated. The average voter gets educated by watching commercials, visiting the occassional website and by watching debates. That's not enough.

You have to be willing to look at what the opposition says about a candidate, read their responses to questionaires from people like the League of Women Voters and to lobbying groups like the NRA or the Sierra Club, check their voting record (if they have one), determine who their contributors are, figure out where their allegiences lie, learn about who they are as people and see who is endorsing them and why.

If you don't do that, you really aren't an informed voter and, even if you do it, but go into it with your mind made up, you aren't really informed.

Unfortunately, about half of the people who do vote in any given election think they know what is best for the rest of America when, in reality, they don't know any better than anyone else. It is the greatest delusion of the voting public, which is why I'd prefer that EVERYONE got his/her opportunity to vote and voted his/her conscience. At least we'd get a broad range of ideas meaning a greater change for objectivity and balance.

 

Good post, Jeff.

I also take the potential to success into account in deciding who to support. And I'll readily admit there are times I'll vote for the candidate with a lesser chance at success at doing the things I'd like done rather than the candidate with a greater chance succeeding at things I don't want done. I voted Lee Brown over Mosbacher, for example. That is after the best candidate, Greanias, was eliminated.

I get so sick of hearing that voters aren't hearing enough about the issues. Everything you need to know about the candidates in virtually any race is there to be found if you look. The reason most voters don't hear enough about the issues is that they don't look. They get their news in 30 second to 2 minute bites. People post here all the time saying they don't know what Bush or Kerry stands for, what their plans are, what they'd do if elected. All the answers are readily available. People just aren't looking.

I'd love to have a more informed electorate and I think it's something we should shoot for. In the meantime, I'll settle for more voices and more voters, wherever we find them. The GOP should only fear increased registration if the country is currently majority Democrat. I don't think giddyup would characterize the country that way, so I don't really understand why he fears increased registration.

p.s. Re: GV to giddy... Somebody just got served.

 

Giddy, you are misinformed.

The argauble fact is that most voters (over 90% of us) are either uninformed, missinformed or ill-informed.

So what is the big deal if others help others (procastinators and the lazy) register to vote? It is a civil obligation that should be commended and encouraged. Many want to vote but do not know how to go about it. In all, I say let them be. Heck let all of us go out from this week and register at list 5 people a week between now and November 2 so that more people will be part of this unique process.

Anyway, "it is written....." so why even bother......(if you know what I mean).

 

i know some people who are informed but don't want to vote because they don't want to get called for jury duty. (especially since they live in Texas they say their vote "doesn't matter anyway")

 

It doesn't matter what you want Giddy, these people have a constitutional right to vote. Jeff explained perfectly how the current voters in this country break down. Most people vote on single issues or based on tradition. Is that really an informed vote? What's your basis for this complaint? I've only seen hints like the pack of cigarettes thing (do you think people are really going to register months before an election and then vote on nov. 2 for a pack of cigarettes? Maybe a whole carton?). How are you an informed voter? You continue to post email rumors that most people delete. If your politics come from chain mail, I don't think I want you to vote either.

You say you don't want idiots participating, yet you don't mind that mindless fanatics are told how to vote by televangelist since they vote the same way you do. You may not have said it, but it's basically clear as day that what you really want to say is that you don't want people who would vote Democrat to be motivated to vote.

Anyways, I'd really like you to explain this cigarette thing, and it better be a modern reference. Don't tell me about Boss Tweed or something. Of course, you could just post the email that inspired this thread, that would be quick.

 

Are the liberals really going to blame another loss on low voter turnout? Excuses, excuses... I love it how they know the voting inclination of people who don't even vote. Can the liberals tell me tonight's winning lotto numbers too?

 

I suppose the irony here is that Bush will probably be the ultimate beneficiary if lots of uninformed voters storm the voting booths this time around.


P.S.: Is that whole "pack-of-cigarettes" thing true? I'm going to vote anyway, but if I can get a free pack of Camels out of the ordeal, then sign me up! Cigarettes are awesome.

 

I'm not sure that is true. They have voter drives on college campuses, in churches, at shopping malls, at concerts, etc. Voter drives, for the most part, are done to get people involved and get them interested. Just because they aren't paying attention right now doesn't mean they won't. If you are able to register a person to votes who becomes an educated voter, it was worth the effort.

The same argument could be made for Christians attempting to share their faith with non-Christians. Most who canvas for Christianity are not concerned whether or not those who hear the message are interested because if they "save one soul," it was worth it.

I'm not sure this is all that different, especially from the voter registration efforts I've been involved in.

This is also an unfair criticism. If you are members of a predominantly anglo civic club organization forming a get out the vote drive, your first choice of where you will try to register voters probably won't be the low income housing projects. If you are the Urban League, an organization working to empower African Americans, you probably aren't going to send your volunteers into white suburban neighborhoods.

There are also language issues. Latino groups work in predominantly Hispanic areas and there are multiple voter outreach programs for the wide range of Asian and Middle Eastern community members - Vietnamese, Korean, Chinese, Japanese, Indian, Middle Eastern, etc.

As for the "eleventh hour," the reason it is done this way is because voter registration drives rarely go funded outside of campaign season. Most of the voter drives are run by non-profit organizations like the Urban League or LULAC or the Chamber of Commerce or League of Women Voters. Funds are rarely available for registration prior to the start of campaigns.

To make matters more difficult, most registration drives are heavily focused on portions of the community that tend to be transient - young people, students, singles, minorities, the poor. As a result, it makes little sense to try and register someone a year before the election when there is a chance he/she will be living in a different location when the election occurs.

Just to clarify, there has only been one report about trading cigarettes or cash for voting in recent memory and that happened in Milwaukee and it wasn't for registration. It was ON election day.

This is an uneducated criticism. Groups that tend to vote more on the democratic side do tend to get the largest voter registration drives, but that is because they fall into the most transient categories, not because they are uninformed, uneducated or uninterested.

Students, young single people, minorities and the poor are the most common for reasons I mentioned above. And, again, there are MANY reasons for doing voter drives prior to the election.

In fact, most municipalities (cities, counties, etc) sponsor large-scale voting drives aimed at those exact same groups EVERY YEAR. These are government, non-partisan organizations. Harris County, by example, is heavily Republican, yet it sponsors the largest and most agressive GOTV efforts every year prior to election. They deputize hundreds of people every year to get folks registered. They even set goals of how many people they want registered each year.

So, these aren't some shadow, fringe groups out there trying to simply influence votes. It is true that there are SOME groups that do try to influence the vote through GOTV, but it is not the norm AND it is illegal.

I worked on two GOTV campaigns one year for the Urban League and a group representing Asians in the city and BOTH of them were completely non-partisan in nature. They were EXTREMELY careful to not suggest anything either way. Of course they targeted their groups - blacks and Asians respectively - but it is no different than white conservative church organizations encouraging their members to vote without prejudice to party affiliation.

I didn't say that. I said that there are certainly GOTV efforts by groups and funded in an effort to get out certain votes, but it is absolutely no different than flooding an area with flyers or radio/tv advertising. And, I don't find it unethical because people who are encouraged to register don't always do so, nor do they vote. Just because people are registered doesn't mean they actually vote. In fact, only about 50 percent of the registered voters turnout on BIG election days and only about 35 percent of the eligible voting population is registered. Those numbers have remained relatively unchanged over the past 10 years and are actually a significant reduction since the 1970's.

Personally, I'd like it better if a candidate needed more than 18 percent of the entire population of the country to become the next president. Nothing good comes of exclusivity in the voting process.

 

Whoa, I never said *you* believed these things. You're one of the intelligent posters on the board, and I respect your opinions. Plus, it doesn't further debate if I misquote you for a cheap shot. I'm sorry I offended you. It was not my intent.

I was just noting that many ideas expressed from Republican circles recently have been -- in my humble opinion -- inching closer to totalitarianism. And I think it's wrong.

 

If you're talking about anti-Bush voters you may be mistaken. Considering how many people continue to hold onto the belief that Saddam is directly tied to 9/11 the uninformed vote might benefit Bush more.

On the overall subject I think the lack of voting and being uninimformed are really two parts of the same problem. If more people were informed about the issues that face us I think more people would vote.

 

I think the problem, giddy, is that you seem to think that voter registration efforts aren't really worth the effort because, if the people being registered don't care enough to look into registering in the first place, why bother.

That, IMO, is a significant cop out. That is like saying, well, these kids sure look bored in class. Why bother trying to teach them if they don't care?

The whole point is to educated people and get them involved. Once they are involved, then it is up to them to do the rest. But, just giving up is unacceptable. None of us knows what impact registering someone to vote will have.