Wednesday, June 6, 2012

After All That, Just A 57% WI Turnout

It amazes me that only 57% of the statewide electorate turned out for the Walker - - Barrett face off last night.

It's still a big number for gubernatorial races, the Journal Sentinel reports, but means indisputably that huge numbers of eligible voters just do not vote, even in an election this highly-publicized and easy to figure out - - no tricky, 300-word referendum question where "no" actually means "yes," for example.

Just two half-inch lines penciled on a ballot.

Maybe people didn't like their choices - - but there the choices were.

Or maybe non-voters sent a message of disgust about or disassociation from the entire matter - - but that's over-thinking it and giving credit where it is not due.

We live in a representative democracy and not much more than half the electorate cares who represents them, spends their money and structures a great deal of the world around them.

No one is required to vote - - I understand that.

But what a statement of disregard for the state of the state we all live in and pass along. I'm less perplexed this morning about why my candidate lost than I am about why so many people sat it out.


7 comments:

Anonymous said...

On a related note, I had a debate with a friend about how Barrett ran the campaign, how national Democrats did or did not help, how our side has to deliver the message better, etc., etc.

And all I keep thinking is none of that matters. I knew all the issues. I know who Walker is and I know what he's about. How can anyone not? After all the protests last year, after the numerous recalls of State Senators, after the shenanigans, after everything.... How is it there's anyone in this state who doesn't see what's happening, doesn't know who the players are and what they're about, and doesn't know how important it is to vote and vote out Walker? How?

It's not about how we deliver the message or get the message just right or fine tune it to appeal to just the right segment, etc. etc. None of that matters. We're talking about two groups of people: the 43% who just simply didn't care enough to vote and the 53% of the remaining 57% who would still, still, still vote for Walker even after he and his cronies engaged in an all out assault on democracy and workers rights. I can at least identify with the reasons behind those who voted for walker. I can understand that they have reasons, even if their reasons are wrong. The non-voters were... what....? Too busy playing Diablo 3?

It really isn't about refining the message and delivering it just right in all the right ways with all one's new found social media savvy. There's something deeply flawed in our democracy and society when everything we have is on the line in one way or another.

A good place for the Democratic Party and the unions to start if they want to mobilize people and get more membership might be for them to do a serious analysis of those who did not vote. Find out who they are as a group and do some serious research. Those people who did not vote probably overall agree with Democrats and unions. But how to reach them? How to make them see what's at stake? How to see that they have a stake, their own stake in our society.

Maybe that's what I'm getting at: 43% of Wisconsin's electorate did not feel like they have enough of a stake in our State to go vote, even when their rights and economic livelihood are on the line. Why? How did it get this way? What can we do about it?

And after all that, maybe it's too late? Maybe these people will never have their minds changed, will never care?

Anonymous said...

DID YA EVER THINK THAT THOSE PEOPLE CAN'T READ NOR COMPREHEND WHAT IS GOING AROUND THEM... BLAME THE UNION SCHOOL SYSTEM.

GOV WALKER IS TRYING TO FIX THAT.

OH WELL BARRETT GOES BACK TO MILWAUKEE AND 50% OF THE BLACK MALES WILL STILL BE UNEMPLOYEED

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

And typing it in all caps just makes it that much truthier.

As well as making the misspellings and poor grammar in a comment talking about OTHER people being dumb that much more HILARIOUS.

JB said...

I'm not so sure about blaming the union school system. We might do better to look at their textbooks (Thanks, Texas School Book Commission, or whatever it's called) and the results of teaching to the test.

There are a lot of people who do not understand even the basic fundamentals of voting. Where I worked yesterday, young people (in their 20s) approached us and asked if they could vote. We checked their addresses, and said, no, your polling place is thus and such. Some were eager to go to those polling places, some were totally astonished that they could not register and vote wherever there was a polling place.

We've lost civics education, along with education about history (and how history repeats itself). Sadly, we are seeing the results.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 1: Completely agree. Assorted relatives and friends of mine who did not vote believe that it does not really matter who is elected as all politicians are basically the same. I tried to point out the differences and was unsuccessful. Anonymous 2: You make no sense. Shouting does not help!
I guess that makes me anonymous 3.

Gareth said...

There are many people in society who exist in an economic or cultural alienation from the whole.
They don't live in the same world that we do. No matter who wins an election they notice little change in their lives. It's absolutley logical for them to think that voting is pointless. In fact, it takes a leap of faith to believe otherwise.

Elections almost always result in disappointment. If your candidate loses you are disappointed. If he wins and inevitably breaks campaign promises, you are also disappointed.

If you want more people to vote you need to engage them in society first. That takes place through very local organizing and social reconstruction. End the social isolation and voting will eventually follow.

Then there is the problem of the two party system, which we must accept and which can never be changed because corrupt politicians two-hundred years ago set it up. It's a machine that produces disenfranchisement through training voters to willingly accept less, as an act of good citizenship.

In my opinion it's always been a bit of a con game designed around the concept of voting for the candidate who you intuit will do you the least harm.

As the comedian Lewis Black puts it "The two party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in the mirror".

I've voted every year since 1972 but each time I can't quite shake the feeling that I fell for the same old trick again.

Evan Rowe said...

You can easily get people to vote. Run a campaign that promises and delivers a guaranteed income of 1k per month paid for by higher capital gains taxes.

Until then, you can shut the hell up about trying to get people to see your candidates and parties in abstract religious terms. Every man and woman on the street knows what a g is.