Voting (in CA) is for chumps.

By   |  October 9, 2008

Despite the new feverish push to get potential voters (especially the youth) to actually go out and vote for our next president, there are no actual benefits in doing so.

The logic behind such non-behavior is the fact we are  Californians and though we are the largest state with the most electoral votes (55), Californians are non-factors in deciding the outcome of the election. Perhaps if we each had a vote in the few vital swing states (Ohio, Florida, etc.) that decide the election each year, our votes would actually be relevant. The fact of the matter is that ultimately, the elections are decided on these swing states, and these states alone.

In addition, with the current electoral college in place, it’s very likely your vote will NOT count. All electoral votes for a state are awarded to the winner despite the possibility he may only have won by the slimmest of margains. Because it is not a direct election (popular vote), if you vote for the losing candidate, your vote is ultimately void. In this way, for a state like California, whose winner is very often easy to predict, voting for anyone else but the favorite very often ends up being a complete waste.

According to www.calcounts.com:

“In the last presidential election in California, over 5.5 million voters cast a ballot for someone other than the winner. That’s more votes than were cast for the winning candidate in any of the 49 other states, yet every one of the 5.5 million ballots was wasted under the current unfair winner-take-all system.”

Essentially, if you vote for the underdog in California and he loses, (which is the usual outcome) you wasted your vote because all points go to the winner; if you voted for the frontrunner in California and he wins, (which is the usual outcome) you just threw your vote in for a group that never needed your help in the first place.

Just watch the election night coverage; CA’s result is never in debate. Ultimately, without a popular vote, voter turnout, especially in California, will never reach its full potential.

With the election out of our hands, why bother?

Comments? Leave your intelligent feedback down below or consider following CollegeTimes on Facebook or Twitter to stay updated or to get in touch!

Share This Story:

Page ID #111  -  Last updated on
Tags:  

Please scroll down to leave a comment.

2 Comments on “Voting (in CA) is for chumps.”  (RSS)

  1. I agree, local elections or propositions are definitely necessary if you want to be politically active or feel strongly about something. However, as said, the Presidential election in CA is little more than a formality.

  2. I like your take on this lol. However, with a popular vote, I don’t think much would change for California. Our population will continue to grow but mainly in metropolitan, lower-class areas that always vote liberally. The only reason to vote in California is for the various propositions and local elections each fall.

Leave a Reply to admin Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.*



You may use these HTML tags and attributes:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*

2019 MBA Admissions Consulting

These days, college is expensive and not the best choice for everyone. But do you know which degree is still highly valuable? That's right, an MBA degree. If you study at a high quality MBA program in the United States, you can use that degree to improve your reputation and career ANYWHERE in the world, unlike law or medical degrees (or worthless degrees from diploma mills). Contact our experts to see if you're a good candidate for our top MBA programs... all our programs are accredited by AACSB! Official MBA partner of The Economist.

[contact-form-7 id='66877' title='Aringo Form']