34% of the US population doesn't vote. Why do polticalitcians cling to the idea that these voters can't be reached?

Comments

• palebluethought@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  What do you mean “cling to the idea they can’t be reached?” A huge portion of political spending goes towards trying to increase turnout (of the people likely to vote for you).

  source

  • TheButtonJustSpins@infosec.pub ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Could make it mandatory like Australia.

    Of course, many in the political space are trying to limit voting, so…

    source

    • SolidShake@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Americans would cry about mandatory voting. World’s biggest snowflakes, I’m sure if that was proposed they’d just say "ugh but the constitution, freedom and stuff, stupid libs "

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Tanoh@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Personally I think mandatory voting is a bad idea. It will not make then suddenly care, they will just vote for lolrolfcopter party.

      The US does a lot of bad things around voting, but it being on a workday is probably the biggest hurdle. Most other countries have it on a weekend or holiday. That means that most people can go vote and not have to chose between potentially getting fired and vote. Which, to no surprise mostly affects lower income voters.

      Also combined with the witch hunt on mail in voting makes it very hard for lower income people to vote. Which is by design.

      source
• FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I have sympathy for non-voters in the US. Not so much out of principle but because of how it is done. Voting takes place on a Tuesday. That’s because in ye olden days you had to allow people to attend church on Sunday before making the trip on horseback to participate in the election. That’s a cute tradition but clashes with the way the economy works today. People are very dependent on their low-wage jobs that they can be fired from easily. If you’re working two of those jobs to make ends meet, you may not have the “luxury” to skip work to go and vote on a normal weekday. That luxury often includes having to fill in a booklet of stuff that’s on the ballot. You’re not just voting on a president, a senator, or a congressperson. You may be asked your option on a plebiscite, a judge, a sheriff, a school board, etc. It is overinflated in my view and explains long slow moving lines at ballot stations that you don’t often see elsewhere. And that’s after a possibly Kafkaesque registration process to be eligible in the first place or to get mail-ins in some states. It is almost designed to keep people away. Maybe you’re taking these structural problems as something “politicians cling to.”

  Make election day a public holiday that forces businesses who are open anyway to allow all their employees to go and vote.

  source

  • BeefPiano@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    A lot of those low-wage workers don’t get federal holidays off. Ever go to a liquor store on Independence Day? Or a restaurant on Veterans Day? Or fill up your gas tank on Washington’s Birthday?

    A better system is universal early and mail-in voting with as few impediments as possible. If you need to require identification, that ID needs to be free. There should be no monetary barriers to voting.

    source

    • FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I don’t mind your suggestion. I think universal mail-ins are a good idea. At the same time, I have an inkling that you didn’t read my comment all the way to the end.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• aceshigh@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I’ll tell you why I didn’t used to vote. I worked too many hours and was emotionally exhausted all of the time. I didn’t have hobbies or interests or energy to do anything else. My personal life was a complete mess. I didn’t have friends or relationships either. I ate poorly and didn’t exercise. All I literally did was work. I suspect a lot of people were in my shoes.

  source

  • WhatYouNeed@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    The bullshit requirement for the vote to be on a Tuesday.

    Vote should be on a weekend.

    source

    • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It should be national election week, not election day

      source
    • Darbage@lemmy.today ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I’m a waiter, that one Saturday could be 25% of my monthly income. It should be a national holiday

      source
    • aceshigh@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      My state allows for mail in voting. My problem was that I was always stuck in survival mode. I couldn’t take care of my basic needs, there was no room for civic duties. It’s like I was in a trance. The problem is having to work too many hours, plus commute.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• NatakuNox@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Because that would require a lot of work, and 99.99% of politicians are in it for the power and money. Not to actually help their constituents.

  source

  • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I guess that’s fair and they know they’re never going to be able on the promised they make.

    source
• los_chill@programming.dev ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Because one party doesn’t want them to vote and voter supression campaigns have become extremely powerful. And it goes beyond the beurocratic tactics like voter IDs. Apathy, cynicism, and distrust are also part of the right-wing propaganda. Opposition parties fight an uphill battle to engage more voters.

  source

  • pimento64@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    /thread

    source
• nullpotential@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Polticalitcians?

  source

  • knightmare1147@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Polt-i-cal-it-cians.

    source
• vvilld@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Why do polticalitcians cling to the idea that these voters can’t be reached?

  They don’t. At least not the politicians who tend to do well. Reaching people who had never voted in any previous election was the central strategy to both Obama’s and Trump’s campaigns, and those were the two most successful electoral politicians in national American politics of the past 2 decades.

  source
• Asafum@feddit.nl ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  There is actually some evidence that musk was unfortunately successful at reaching some of these people. There was a lot of talk about “strange” ballots that only voted for Trump and nothing else, usually called “bullet ballots.” Well apparently part of musks outreach plan was getting to low propensity voters and telling them “don’t worry if it’s confusing, don’t worry about knowing the candidates, the only thing we need is a vote for Trump and he’ll fix everything.”

  It seems like it worked out for them… :(

  source

  • aceshigh@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    The bullet ballots were such a statistical anomaly. They should have been investigated/double checked.

    source
• HappySkullsplitter@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Because that group likely thinks both options are terrible and think it’s a pointless waste of time

  Ultimately proven correct

  source

  • timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Self fulfilling prophecy.

    source
• jerkface@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  They do. That’s why voter suppression is such a big factor in every election.

  source
• ChairmanMeow@programming.dev ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Most non-voters don’t hold significantly different beliefs than the voting population. In non-competitive states, it means motivating them to vote is unlikely to tip the scales. Why bother tipping the results from 60% to 55% by spending millions on it? Better to allocate those funds to a 53% to 48% potential flip.

  In battleground states they do try to reach these people.

  source

  • jerkface@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I don’t think that your assumptions are true. Non-voters tend to be more progressive than voters, because conservatives vote religiously out of a sense of duty and responsibility, and progressives vote when they feel like it.

    source

    • ChairmanMeow@programming.dev ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I mean, non-voters aren’t much more progressive really. They’re more likely to be independents (in the US at least). See:

      Image

      They do skew a bit more D, but not massively so. They’re also largely non-white, less well educated and poorer. It’s a bit of a toss-up whether any of those demographics skew R or D.

      I don’t really see much evidence that they’re more progressive, more centrist at best really. Although I suppose if you flatten political beliefs on a 1-dimensional axis, that does mean more progressive on average.

      Do note that this differs per state, and voter turnout is also correlated with general results skewing harder in a certain direction. Complexities all around!

      source
• Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  You’re asking why the politicians don’t reach out to the 34%. Meanwhile for the past 10 years politicians have been ranting about dead people voting. A statistic that is blatently false, and has NEVER shown any significant amount of votes coming from dead people. They did find some confusion when old people voted early by mail, but died before election day. But those numbers were a rounding error at best.

  So maybe these politicians are thinking “Well we can’t reach the non-voters because they’re dead!”

  And then they go on fox news and argue about frogs being gay, or whatever bullshit to distract from actual issues.

  source

  • Letme@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Meanwhile, Trump won with only 28% of registered voters. The GOP is the minority, our political/voting system is by design.

    source
• Ledericas@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  less people voting helps conservatives, thats why they use disenfranchisement, voter suppression and gerrymandering in the states, plus the all the propaganda “your vote doesnt matter” is drilled into peoples heads.

  source
• ToadOfHypnosis@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  They need to just put voting in with taxes. Everyone files taxes and if they aren’t at least filing them, then they shouldn’t vote. Setting up in person poling is expensive and takes a ton of volunteering and is a rush to happen over time. The IRS is already solid at record keeping and the infrastructure for data collection is there. We don’t need years of campaigning. Plus, it would kill the horse race aspect of things if the votes were all tallied as they go. I think it would make the whole system easier and would help with any voter verification issues. No one is filing taxes in duplicate to vote more than once. Lol

  source

  • rwdf@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    But voting should be secret and confidential. Plus, how do you ensure someone isn’t voting on someone else’s behalf?

    source
  • GluWu@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    If you make less than $11,600 in 2024 you don’t file taxes because there’s no federal tax on that. So yeah, take away peoples voting rights because they’re poor. Great fucking idea, so progressive.

    source

    • ToadOfHypnosis@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I thought you still had to file regardless, even if you aren’t paying anything. I filed when I was in college made under that limit working part time. Got money refunded from my taxes paid because I was below the poverty line.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Skullgrid@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Because every time is someone’s first time, and due to voter registration being necessary a zillion years before the actual vote, no one specifies that and runs "VOTE ON NOV N^TH^ " ads a week before the election day.

  source
• circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  As others have said, this seems like an ill-formed question. Do you have reason to believe that politicians “cling to the idea that these voters can’t be reached”?

  source
• daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Reaching means addressing their issues. Addressing one person issues will probably conflict with other person issues. Wich mean that a choose have to be made on to who represent.

  Some people are easier to address than other. Some people are more exigent to their representatives than others. Making it not wort it trying to address them.

  It’s important to mention that just by “mentioning” people in your campaign those people are not going to vote you. You need to do specific politics that solve the problems they may have. Which is not easy and most of the times it opposes what other people want you to do.

  source
• reksas@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  maybe they just consider those people successfully suppressed

  source
• Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  From my own impression as a member of a small political party in my own country who joined not out of tribalism but simply because they seemed to mostly want the same things as I do, party members live in a bubble of people who are heavilly into politics and understand the importance of politics, whilst the leadership specifically in addition to this are also mostly surrounded by generally unquestioningly hero worship from the common party members plus they tend to have quite limited life experience outside the party as they’ve joined it as young adults (maybe when they were at university and involved in student movements) and it and its internal environment have always been a large part of their lives.

  Those people usually see the supporters of their political adversaries in the same way as fans of a sports club see fans of other clubs, and don’t really “get” the point of view of people who don’t vote at all.

  source