HuskerBoard

That's not Trump's fault, or Clinton's fault. Too many people choose not to vote. They complain that all the options are bad, then the don't vote, and bad people get elected (BUT NOT UNELECTED WHICH COMPOUNDS THE PROBLEM) and the cycle continues. More bad choices, fewer people voting, and terrible politicians in office.

Basically, if you want change and you don't vote, you're part of the problem.

I agree. Just get out and vote. Don't be confused, mad, lazy...Just do your best and vote.

I got my ballot in the mail yesterday. I will complete the ballot and turn it in, but I'm leaving the presidential choices blank. I can't honestly be in favor of Trump or Clinton. If I am part of the "problem" so be it.

Mostly the "problem" is Congress. With a president, even if you choose not to vote they're out in a maximum 8 years.

Don't vote for president, that's OK (mostly). But DO vote for Congress. And elect different people more often.

The local elections are probably the most important to people's lives, but those are the ones with the least attention and lowest voter turnout.

If that stat is true, it has to be partly compounded by eligible voters being ~68% of the population, and registered voters being ~66% of eligible voters.

Zoogs, I was wondering if the stat was being overblown by not indicating the % of the population is actually eligible to vote.

Absolutely zoogs, that cuts it down to 44.8% of the population being registered and not all of them will vote. Some feel it is bad that so few vote, I don't. If that many are too lazy or disinterested to vote, what kind of informed vote would they be casting anyway?

I do think it's fair to say that voter turnout is a little low in the United States. It's just that 20% seems more like a shock value statistic.

Man, that's a gross statistic, we need to do better.

I'd be much more inclined to vote if the popular vote was what really mattered. As long as the electoral college exists, that's just not the case.

The electoral college is the thing that enables smaller population states to be interested in the presidential election. Otherwise, the candidates would only care about the large population cities.

Example, the states of ID, MT, WY, ND, SD, NE, KS, OK, IA, MO, AR have 56 combined electoral votes with a combined population of 25M people, while CA has 55 electoral votes with a population of 37M people.

As far as campaigning goes, yes. But do most people need them to come to their cities to make a decision? I certainly don't.

Yea the popular vote might make a difference to some delegates but I'm somewhat of the opinion that they're gonna vote the way the want to, one way or the other.