Does a vote make a signficant difference in the governance of political states?

[Dio]

It is pretty much the same as the topic subject. Do you think that an individual's vote really makes a sigficant difference in the outcome of proposition or elections in the United States of America or other political states?

[Dio]

I have often wondered why it appears as if many people in my state vote without doing actual research  on political candiates for elections. For example, some of the political incumbents from my state have in the same office for over 20 years!?!?!

[Unorthodox]

This state is so republican, any vote otherwise would be worthless. 

I understand some other states that may not be the case. 

[JarlWolf]

I think democracy is fairly flawed as a government, but if run properly- which is rare; democratic politics to fully work take a mindset that isn't so individualistic. The one vote and opinion will not impact much, but you take the one and bind it with the many, it will move mountains like a coursing river. So its futile to bother thinking your vote has no worth, because on its own its not powerful, but no powerful machine runs on a single component alone. It takes many parts to make it.


As for if the voting process itself will really matter in a nation or election, it really depends on the nation and who's running. A lot of people are apathetic and just vote to feel like they met an obligation, some have no choice, and then some are so misinformed they will believe whatever is propagated by a media campaign.

[Unorthodox]

I think democracy is fairly flawed as a government

OP specifically asked about the united states, which is NOT a democracy. 

, but if run properly- which is rare; democratic politics to fully work take a mindset that isn't so individualistic. The one vote and opinion will not impact much, but you take the one and bind it with the many, it will move mountains like a coursing river. So its futile to bother thinking your vote has no worth, because on its own its not powerful, but no powerful machine runs on a single component alone. It takes many parts to make it.

The problem with elections in the US is the whole all or nothing rules.  A presidential candidate can win a state by 1% of the vote, and they will receive ALL that states votes.  My state votes republican.  Period.  End of story.  There is no use being in the minority as your vote is not allowed to join with similar minds that might be in the next state. 

Presidential candidates are the most widely known example, but similar things happen in representative elections as well.  Utah had a district in SLC that had voted democrat for the last 10 years or so, so they just redrew the borders so that district was broken up and mixed with heavily republican areas.  Poof, change of representatives. 

[Buster's Uncle]

I vote anyway - if you don't turn out to support candidates even though they're going to lose, they look even weaker than they are.

[JarlWolf]

And that Uno, is what First Past the Post is called. Or all or nothing, other democracies (which you stated, the US isn't, it's a Two party Republic with plutocrats backing it) there is a system called proportional representation. Which gives political parties power based on how much of the population supports them, so say if 20% went to a Keynesian style liberal party and then another more right wing neo con part had about 15, and then Social democrats had 40, Communists 10, and fascists 7 or whatever- the amount of percent of the population that voted for them would reflect their number of seats in a government.

Most of the world uses this system, rather then the American first past the post.

[Geo]

It seems to show an uncanny state of mind on Americans. "All or nothing". Sounds pretty much like "Blaze of glory" to me.

[Rusty Edge]

I vote anyway - if you don't turn out to support candidates even though they're going to lose, they look even weaker than they are.

I would say the answer is yes, but you never know when.
I have lived in the "Purple" states of Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, where all statewide elections are usually up for grabs.

On the other hand, I live in one of those "safe/protected" congressional districts. Short of a major scandal  my Congressman has a job for life. No opposition candidate could get elected, and no challenger could unseat a powerful incumbent.

From working in political campaigns, I don't think they much care about the citizens who are too ignorant/apathetic/cynical to vote. It's the ones that vote for minority parties and write ins that can get their attention. Whenever a race is close, or whenever they are trailing in a poll, they're going to contemplate pleasing those "other" voters, if only to deny them to the competition, or to give themselves an appearance of a popular mandate.

So vote. Write in Green Party, or Libertarian Party, Christian Coalition, TEA party, Common Cause or anything else that gets  your message across in a word or two. If you can do that by saying Ralph Nader, Mr. Snowden, Ronald Reagan, somebody will read the line entry  totals and take a hint. You will become a factor in their calculus.

[Rusty Edge]

It seems to show an uncanny state of mind on Americans. "All or nothing". Sounds pretty much like "Blaze of glory" to me.

Maybe it is.

The system was designed and evolved to convey the appearance of a mandate so that the victor could govern. It was also designed to protect the rights of various minorities, and to make it hard to make dramatic changes quickly. It was designed to be able to evolve over time.    I consider it a surprising success, as the first modern democratic republic.

France adopted a Constitution shortly thereafter, and has had a dozen or more of them since. It's hard to judge which ones to include, there have been so many.

There's been pressure to change The Constitution, but there's a lot of disagreement as to how. Maybe we'll go out in a blaze of glory, maybe we'll stay trapped in the past.  Maybe we'll even find a way forward.

Not that I know what that should be.

[Yitzi]

A vote?  Not really.

Once you get into a larger number of them, it potentially can.

From working in political campaigns, I don't think they much care about the citizens who are too ignorant/apathetic/cynical to vote. It's the ones that vote for minority parties and write ins that can get their attention. Whenever a race is close, or whenever they are trailing in a poll, they're going to contemplate pleasing those "other" voters, if only to deny them to the competition, or to give themselves an appearance of a popular mandate.

What about the ones who almost always vote for a major party, but sometimes vote for one and sometimes the other, depending on how the candidates are on the issues they care most about?

[Rusty Edge]

A
What about the ones who almost always vote for a major party, but sometimes vote for one and sometimes the other, depending on how the candidates are on the issues they care most about?

They label you a "Swing voter" presume you're persuadable, and all candidates spend money trying to sway you.

[Yitzi]

A
What about the ones who almost always vote for a major party, but sometimes vote for one and sometimes the other, depending on how the candidates are on the issues they care most about?

They label you a "Swing voter" presume you're persuadable, and all candidates spend money trying to sway you.

What if one of the major issues you vote on is favoring whoever spends less money?

[Rusty Edge]

Then I'll vote for you.