Voting is not rational, but that doesn’t mean it’s invalid. Being rational all the time would make Jack a dull electorate. Besides, if rational people rationally decided not to vote, only irrational people would decide elections. (Pop quiz: How do I know that isn’t what’s already happening?)

Voting is sympathetic magic; we hope that by casting our tiny spell for our candidate, we somehow magically influence the outcome, even though there has never been a presidential election decided by one vote. If you want to cast really strong sympathetic magic, it’s not enough to just vote; you’d better give money and volunteer, as well. The fact that you can’t say “sympathetic” without “pathetic” should never enter your mind.

Voting is way of signaling to all the other voters, “hey, I’m mainstream, accept me!” Voting is a bit like showering that way.

Voting is fun, but drinking and voting is even more fun, and voting on LSD is so much fun they might have to peel you off the ceiling of the ballot booth.

Voting only encourages them, but don’t let that discourage you. It’s not like they’re waiting for your encouragement.

Don’t you make that face while you vote. What if it freezes that way?

If you don’t vote, you have no right to complain. I mean, no right except for the right to complain given you by the First Amendment. Which, by the way, is something people don’t get to vote on. But if they did, you’d be in trouble then, non-voters!

Voting in the USA is a restaurant which offers you a menu with five options, only two of which the kitchen is willing to prepare, and you should be grateful for your two choices, because don’t you know that people have fought and died just to get you this menu, you fucking ungrateful ingrate?

Eat! Eat! Swallow!

* * *

I voted several days ago.

Voting actually is fun. It fosters a pleasing feeling of engagement with something larger than myself, and I guess that’s reason enough to vote. I mean, it must be reason enough to vote, because otherwise why did I vote? I voted; therefore I had reason to vote. Quod erat demonstrandum. (And que sara sara, while I’m at it).

In case you’re wondering, I voted for Kerry, not some dumb third party candidate who actually represents my beliefs hopes ideals and political views, so accept me! (But of course you don’t have to accept me; it’s not like I can take my vote back.)

I was tempted to write in Nader, to spite the Democrats who applauded Nader being kept off the ballot and call Nader voters names. But in the end, I decided that it would be wrong to vote out of spite for the Democrats, when I could vote out of spite for George Bush instead. God bless!

Jack at Random Fate “would take it as a great favor if you would please stop posting every instance of insane behavior by someone who is nominally supportive of your political opponents, because YOUR SIDE IS JUST AS BAD.”

I haven’t been completely innocent on this score, I have to admit. Still, Jack’s point is well taken.

Link via Rachel Ann, who is not feeling optimistic about post-election America.

UPDATE: Just to clarify, I was intending for this post to address the “look at what this individual did” sort of complaints, not larger-scale issues like organized attempts to reduce ballot access.

That said, I think the widespread and very dishonest Democratic campaign to keep Nader off of the ballot shows that many Democratic Party leaders have the same disdain for democracy that Republicans do. What the Democrats did in Oregon, for example, should be inexcusable to anyone who isn’t anti-democracy.

I’ve been meaning to link to this long post by Frumdad for a while (ever since Rachel Ann pointed it out to me). The post explains how Frumdad (”frum” is a term Orthodox Jews use to means “religiously orthodox,” by the way) reconciles Orthodox Judaism with his decision to vote for Kerry.

I particularly liked his discussion of same-sex marriage. Here’s a sample:

I’m not saying, of course, that “if gay marriage is banned the Nazis will rise again,” or anything of that nature. (That would put me seriously in “get a grip” land.)

I would say, however, that for those of us in minority religions, it is shortsighted to support a law - any law - which “solves” a contentious moral issue by forcing all of us to abide by the majority’s religious views, rather than leaving such matters up to individual conscience.