Re: [pf] Nader on The Connection today (NPR)

by Betsy Barnum

19 December 2000 04:24 UTC

Sharon Flesher wrote:

> I'm convinced that low turnout is more
> a result of laziness, time constraints, lack of interest and other
> distractions than disgust at the offerings.

What's behind the lack of interest, though? I think Molly's right that there's a
perception, somewhere alongh the line, that political participation is not worth
the time and effort. Why would a person feel that way? Whether it's due to
piss-poor education about democracy, a political and social system that does not
encourage citizenship and responsibility, the rightward motion of both parties
in recent elections, the lack of public discourse on issues, campaigns that
don't deal with issues, people's disgust with the whole sorry mess or their
failure to perceive their stake in government, the fact that people don't
participate is a severe indictment of our system, not an indictment of 50
million people's personal laziness or apathy or complacency. IMHO.

Here in Minneapolis, we had about an 85% voter turnout last month. My guess is
that lots of folks got very scared about Dubya when he pulled a few points ahead
of Gore in the weeks before the election, and many who weren't planning to vote
came out to vote for Al (this is a Democratic town). Without the scare, we
probably would have had 60-65%. People around here felt that their vote might
actually matter, so they voted. This is, IMO, not the best reason to decide to
participate. But it does show that folks who are thought of as lazy, apathetic,
distracted or irresponsible *are* paying attention and *will* participate if
they are moved by the idea that their vote matters.

Betsy