Undecided voter = idiots.

At this point, I’m tired of polls. I’m tired of discussions about; race, issues, merits, experience, redistribution of wealth, health care plans, the war, the economy, who is more like George Bush and if any of this matters.

Our system is set-up to really screw-up:

  • The popular vote doesn’t count- so if your state is close to “balanced” you become a swing state which means you can’t escape this stupidity.
  • We spend way too much money on sound-bites, and not near enough time and effort on debates. The first 3 “debates” (2 presidential one VP) were absolute dreck- if we had 3 of the number 3- we’d all be able to learn a lot more. [hint: flag pin questions don’t cut it]
  • Media- that get a good amount of all that political cash- likes the vote to be close- so more money is spent with them. Of course, since they “report” the polls- they help fan the flames. Polls should be illegal. Keep it all private until the election.
  • Hot-button issues like: guns, god, gay marriage, abortion etc. aren’t decided by the president, so why bother arguing about them?
  • All politicians tell us they are going to cut taxes. None do. So why do we talk about it like it means anything? Time for truth in campaigning laws- where we can actually sue them for flip-flopping or lying.
  • We’re supposed to be a nation that separates church and state- so why do we care so much about a candidates religion?
  • Last I checked, there is no “presidential training program”- so debate about “qualifications” is yet another bit of BS. It’s sort of like trying to compare who removes an appendix better- you can only have it done once, so you can’t do a double-blind.
  • As long as we let people buy politicians and allow “lobbyists” to do their thing- a lot of people will be disenfranchised- it’s time to eliminate all campaign “donations” over $100 per candidate. Set up a realtime system that’s free to use- which will only allow each individual to only give $100 per candidate, and a fund a max of 10 candidates per election cycle- and take the obscene money out of the system.
  • Lastly- we won’t have smart people in office, until we have smart people voting for them. If you are still undecided today- maybe you shouldn’t be voting. Let’s have a civics and literacy test before you can vote. Maybe it’s even time to require a HS diploma to vote, since we can’t seem to get more than a 75% graduation rate in this all powerful country.

So, if in 8 days I have to read another headline from the London papers asking how so many people in our country can be so stupid- like we saw 4 years ago, you won’t say I didn’t warn you.

And, btw- if you’re reading this, you are smart enough to vote. Congrats.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed! If you wish to support this blog and independent journalism in Dayton, consider donating. All of the effort that goes into writing posts and creating videos comes directly out of my pocket, so any amount helps!

Leave a Reply

25 Comments on "Undecided voter = idiots."

Notify of
David Lauri

Hot button issues are decided by the Supreme Court, and the President appoints justices to the Supreme Court.

J.R. Locke

God bless you and God bless America….everyone’s doing it.

Hot button issues shouldn’t be decided by the Supreme Court that is judicial activism….that’s so naughty.

If you want intelligence and more than sound bytes the only realistic thing to do is kill the two party winner take all system. We are basically a pick your favorite color democracy.

David Esrati
David Esrati

@ David-
and remember, if enough people in Congress disagree, they can overturn the Supreme Court.
And while Presidents pick nominees- they still have to make it through Congress. Remember a guy named Robert Bork?

John Ise

Idiots indeed. For the Family Guy’s dead on take: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YOh-rpvjYg

Finally, the Whatsuuuupp guys reunite for Obama: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq8Uc5BFogE
Change is coming.


Democracy is a device that insures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.
—–George Bernard Shaw


David Sedaris said it best about undecided voters in this election:

“To put [undecided voters] in perspective, I think of being on an airplane. The flight attendant comes down the aisle with her food cart and, eventually, parks it beside my seat. “Can I interest you in the chicken?” she asks. “Or would you prefer the platter of shit with bits of broken glass in it?”

To be undecided in this election is to pause for a moment and then ask how the chicken is cooked.”

And yes, someone needs to overturn the electoral college and go to a popular vote.

David Lauri

Is it judicial activism to uphold the Constitution? If so, why bother having a Constitution, or a Supreme Couurt?

Personally I’m glad some rights are protected against the tyranny of the majority.


If we go with the popular vote we would be discriminating against those who do not live in cities – for all you bleeding heart liberal, do you want to discrimination? The answer is yes, when it benefits you.

The system ensures that candidates talk with most everyone, not just those on the coasts.

J.R. Locke

Except those in states that are decidedly red or blue.

Mr. Lauri yes it is when it is so solidly political and partisan. We both know it goes both ways.

I still don’t see the big differences between Obama and McCain….really besides some different tax rates aren’t we really just voting between the bi-racial guy and the old guy?


I think P.J. O’Rourke said, “Today, the American political animal is a chicken with two right wings.”


JR, you are right, there is very little difference. VOTE BOB BARR, libertarian. John McCain is a pain, Obama, come on, Oh No, Oh xxxx, Oh xxxxx, Oh Really. Pick your poison.

Bob Barr on Tues, [editors deletion- no false info for search engines will be tolerated]

David Lauri

Mr. Locke, either we have a Constitution worth upholding, or we don’t. If we do, then it is in fact the job of the Supreme Court to interpret it, subject, yes, as Mr. Esrati points out, to the Supreme Court’s decisions being overturned (though not solely by Congress but rather by the amendment process, which requires, thankfully, more than just a majority vote in Congress).

I haven’t heard conservatives call it judicial activism when the Supreme Court interprets the 2nd Amendment as pertaining to individuals and not just state militias. So why would it be judicial activism if the Court would interpret the full faith and credit clause as pertaining to same sex marriage? (Or perhaps that’s not something you would call judicial activism but you could instead give a different example.)

And it is the types of justices that would be appointed to the Supreme Court by the two main presidential candidates that is in fact one of their key differences. McCain has been very explicit about saying he thinks Roe v. Wade should be overturned. People who disagree with him on that might well find that a good enough reason all by itself not to vote for him.


Sometimes I wonder what it would be like to have a no-party system. What would an election be like without team1 vs. team2??

Maybe it would get rid of a lot of the sports fan mentality our elections bring about.

I never did like cheerleaders anyway.

Teri L

I’m the idiot?

Because I’m taking my time to sort through the shitfest of media coverage in order to thoughtfully make a choice? Because in my heart I know that both major parties effectively control debate, choice, ideas, in order to assure that they remain in power, leaving the perennial choices between TweedleDee and TweedleDum a non-choice? Because the voting process is so entirely f***ed up that we cannot be certain that our votes will get counted and reported honestly? That makes me the idiot?

And how dare you suggest that “If you are still undecided today- maybe you shouldn’t be voting. Let’s have a civics and literacy test before you can vote. Maybe it’s even time to require a HS diploma to vote,”


Yes, let’s set up barriers to vote. And then! Once that’s in place, let’s only let the people we like vote. Let’s do that, David, and then we’ll get real change in this country, because after all, we know what’s best for everyone…

Man oh man…

>At this point, I’m tired

On that, we are in complete agreement.

Drexel Dave

Plato warned us of the dangers of Democracy long ago.


The danger is being uninformed. A recent poll revealed that 48% of Americans believe the Republican Party is the majority in Congress. With shit like this we get what we get – and if it is either Obama or McCain, which it will be, then we get shit, bullshit, horseshit and lies lies lies, BS broken promises and the same old crap.

Change? nothing will change, we all know it, but most of us are not willing to accept that truth. The rich will always rule, the poor will always suffer, the middle class will work their asses off just to survive. Give the middle class thier sports and music, thier food and drink, their art and festivals, and they will survive with a smile on their face but bitch that they aren’t rich. They will never be rich. Just enjoy what you have, NOTHING WILL CHANGE – this is realistic, you know it and I know it. It is the same old shit.

VOTE BOB BARR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Drexel Dave

Plato would have argued that the real danger is allowing the uninformed to have just as strong a voice as the informed and wise…thus his promulgation of his ideal society in The Republic:

Plato, through the words of Socrates, asserts that societies have a tripartite class structure corresponding to the appetite/spirit/reason structure of the individual soul. The appetite/spirit/reason stand for different parts of the body. The body parts symbolize the castes of society.[30]

Productive Which represents the abdomen.(Workers) — the labourers, carpenters, plumbers, masons, merchants, farmers, ranchers, etc. These correspond to the “appetite” part of the soul.

Protective Which represents the chest.(Warriors or Guardians) — those who are adventurous, strong and brave; in the armed forces. These correspond to the “spirit” part of the soul.

Governing Which represents the head. (Rulers or Philosopher Kings) — those who are intelligent, rational, self-controlled, in love with wisdom, well suited to make decisions for the community. These correspond to the “reason” part of the soul and are very few.

Yes Gene, you are correct.

In the 'burg
In the 'burg

Government can’t (and shouldn’t try to) solve all our problems. And the people we elect can only do so much, no matter how talented they are.

But things CAN and DO change. It just requires a paradigm shift and an effort on everyone’s part. And that won’t happen unless we’re inspired.

There’s something to be said for zeitgeist.


Our leaders, Obama and McCain included, just say the stuff they need to say to get elected. There will still be back room deals and nepotism and favors. They will take MY F**KING MONEY AND SPEND IT ON WHATEVER THEY SEE FIT.

Do I use $35-$40k worth of federal taxes a year? NO! But that is what I pay.

If they were to cut all the bullshit out and provide some sort of national health care I would be fine with it – but they like spending it on videos of spotted owls, the flow rate of ketchup, crash testing foreign cars, investigating steroids in baseball, trips to Europe, perks to bosses, paying GOD DAMN SICK DAYS TO F**CKING FEDERAL EMPLOYEES WHO ARE HUNG OVER. THIS IS MY F**KING MONEY. and they take take take and never do I see any of it. And don’t say roads bc I don’t drive that much.

I don’t mind paying, but God forbid I expect some sort of positive results. We are just kidding ourselves if we think there will be change. The only change I see is the pennies in my ashtray.

They are, plain and simple, thieves. ALL OF THEM.

Bruce Kettelle

Hey David, Why are the comments closed on the latest Turner post?

David Esrati
David Esrati

Thanks for the heads up Bruce- I’ve fixed it. I’ve had a spotty internet connection the last 24 hours- something borked. Comment away.

J.R. Locke

I don’t think uniformed voters hurts a democracy any which way. That is some pretentious stuff.

In a two party system it is pointless to debate any of this because both parties are basically the same. Why do you think the talk always revolves around the personal character of the candidate? There are no real society altering changes being proposed by either candidate.

There is no detriment to society whatsoever in the uninformed voting. Everything can be cleansed with fire….look at history.

Drexel Dave

I was drinking with Mojo Nixon once and he gave me a gem of a quote regarding the dems and the repubs.

“The Democrats and the Republicans are two piles of shit in different colored bags.”

Mojo for President. Put a Nixon in the Whitehouse.