As the gubernatorial race in Virginia draws to a close and Election Day approaches, many voters — this columnist included — are finding themselves highly uninspired by the options. No matter which political party you support, there’s plenty to dislike about the two major candidates in this year’s race. Given such general antipathy, it may be tempting for voters to opt for abstention: a huffy refusal to vote at all, for any candidate, because you don’t want to officially support any of the clowns on the ticket. The thought process behind this decision is understandable. Why cast your vote for someone you wish weren’t actually going to govern you?
The logic breaks down, though, when we consider that someone has to end up in office. There is no reset button on the ballot that wipes off all the current names and knocks us back to the primaries. We have our candidates; now we have to choose one. Even if only a single person were to vote in the election, that vote would decide who is to govern this great commonwealth for the next four years — a ridiculous thought, but not that philosophically distant from governors who are elected when only a minority of eligible voters participate in the election. We shouldn’t let our political leaders assume office on the back of our apathy. Refusing to vote sends no meaningful political message, and it harms the democratic process. Voters who find themselves abhorring the thought of voting in this year’s election should give it a second thought.
First, we must recognize that “preferring” a candidate is necessarily relative. Hypothetically — and, given the current state of politics, this is purely hypothetical — there could be a race in which both candidates were so equally adored by the population that no one could definitely say he preferred one to the other. Advocates of voter abstention, if they were philosophically consistent, would say that voters should refrain from voting if they simply didn’t prefer any of the candidates, whether the lack of preference is due to equal approval or equal abhorrence. Few people would condone this logic; instead, we recognize that voters must find some way to differentiate the candidates, and then vote for the one whom they support a tad more. The same philosophy extends to races in which voters consider both candidates to be poor choices. Differentiate the two, and find the one whom you detest the least. In this way, you are indeed voting for the candidate you prefer, even if you actually dislike the candidate himself. And that’s all voting for a candidate really is: picking the best among your available options. This principle holds regardless of the quality of the options.
Second, you shouldn’t allow the potential guilt that comes from voting for a candidate who will eventually fail in office to keep you from participating in the election. It is self-seeking to avoid voting because you want to hold the moral high ground when our officials end up philandering or siphoning public funds. There’s nothing to preserve in a non-participatory stance other than some misplaced satisfaction that you had no part in electing a poor governor because you had no part in the voting process whatsoever. Is the decay of civic participation in the U.S. worth the being able to say “I told you so”? Besides, the counter-charge could always be levied: well, why didn’t you vote for the other guy? He might have won if you had participated, and then this whole mess would have been avoided.
But, most importantly, we must dispel the notion that there is anything poetic or meaningful about withholding your vote. Political protest is valid expression prior to heading to the polls. Once it is time to make a decision, however, you do yourself and your community a disservice by refusing to lend your voice. With or without your vote, a candidate will be elected. You owe it to your community to help choose the person who will govern it for the next four years; you owe it to your community — which includes you — to provide popularly elected leaders who, however miserable at their job they may be, got where they are because they sucked less than the alternative. You owe it to your community to vote.
When it comes time to vote and you hate all your options, resist the temptation to do nothing. Get out there and vote. Pick the asparagus over the Brussels sprouts. Do it because it is better to have a terrible governor who was legitimately elected than to have a terrible governor who got into office with 10 percent voter participation. Cuccinelli may rile your blood; McAuliffe may make you nauseated. My message to you is this: go vote anyway.
Russell Bogue is an Opinion columnist for The Cavalier Daily. His columns run Thursdays.
Read More
PARTING SHOT: No man is an island
By Ava MacBlane | 3 days agoRetirement, as you can tell, has been treating me well. When people ask me now if I miss it, I laugh and tell them some things I definitely don't miss. But I don't always get to tell them about the things I really do miss.
PARTING SHOT: You never know unless you try
By Lexi Baker | 3 days agoMy time at the University was shaped by the people who showed me grace and kindness and by those who had confidence in me, even when I struggled to have it in myself.
PARTING SHOT: A love letter to Cav Daily and Connection
By Ava Proehl | 4 days agoMy time here taught me to look for the genuine, human connection in every moment.
