I'm pretty sure this post is going to get some responses. Especially from my in-laws who all feel quite strongly that everyone should vote. They are of course wrong. There are 2 kinds of people..those that should vote, and those that should not.
I really don't have a problem with voting. I think if people want to do it, they should. We shouldn't go and tell everyone they should vote. Like I said before, some people just shouldn't. I really think my biggest problem is how voting is handled.
Every one's vote is equal. That seems like a nice way of handling things. Everyone should have an equal voice to be heard. The reality of course is that's not true. Every one's voice should not be equal. I pay no attention to "the issues" or "the candidates" or if my "socks match". Why should my vote count the same as someone who actually pays attention to those things (especially the socks thing)? Simple, it shouldn't. And telling people to go out to vote, just to vote makes things worse. If more people vote, it makes your vote worth less. If those people are uninformed it makes your vote worth less by that much more.
Let's put it this way. You and 4 of your close personal friends want to go out to dinner. You want to go to restaurant A, and George wants to go to restaurant B. No one else cares but since this is my scenario you force them to vote because it's their duty as your friends (but it doesn't matter what they vote for) Kramer votes for A because it was the first one said. Elaine says she doesn't really care but if she had to choose it would be B. Newman, being difficult throws in Restaurant C.
So should Kramer's, Elaine's, and Newman's vote count as much as yours and George's? They don't even care where they eat! No, the best solution would be for you to tell George that you want to eat at restaurant A so much, that you'd be willing to buy him an appetizer. He says he wants to eat at restaurant B so much that he'd be willing to buy your entire meal.
George gets to eat at his restaurant, you get a free meal, and everyone is happy that everything is resolved.
The founding fathers tried as best they could to fix this with the Electoral College. Most people denounce the ol' college try as antiquated and obsolete. And to an extent it is. But it's better than simple majority rules (which as the above example shows is really quite silly). Their method was a "past the post" style. This essentially means they have to achieve a goal number before they can win.
I've put some thought into this and I think I've found a solution.
Vote Weighting relies on not only how much you know about trivial stuff such as issues and candidates and but also how much a vote means to you.
So here is how it would work. You have to pass a test on just knowing who is running and what people are talking about. Score less than a certain percentage (we'll leave that up to a vote in congress) and your vote is worth .5 (that's half of one vote). Pass the test and your vote is worth 1 (congratulations you're informed). This is beneficial in 2 ways. First, if people want to have a full they have to at least know what's going on (instead of going just to pull the party ticket). Second, it prevents people who don't know what's going on to have any impact on the race.
The second part is of course the fun part. This is where you get to determine how much you want your person to be elected. So you want person A to be elected so much that you'd be willing to build houses for people in New Orleans. (I would think that should count for at least 4 votes) Bill wants person B to be elected to much that he's willing to give $1 to everyone(that would be worth maybe 2 votes...after all $1 isn't all that much ) Newman wants Person B to be elected to badly that he's willing to kill himself (which really works out well because do we really want such a fanatic voting in more than one election? I didn't think so either)
There's lots of ways this can go. If your candidate wins, you have to do whatever you pledged. If you lose, you get to see all the great work being done by others (and maybe even get $1..or even finally get rid of Newman)
Me? I'm a .5 vote kind of guy.