-Yet here you are, setting it all up yet again... And expecting different result-
People of a voting nation, need to participate.
In actuality, the results do differ:
1840-1892 % of eligible voters who actually voted=80%.
1896-1920 a sharp decline to a low of 45% actually voted.
1928-1940 averaged 60%
It has averaged around 60% ever since, with a low of 49% in 1996 and a high of 57.5% in 2008.
The Socialists and Globalists understand this phenomena, and leverage it to their advantage, 40% of people who don’t vote allow a large pool to be compromised by false identity fraud.
It also means that organizing the vote via unions and organizations, the use of buses, absentee voting, and other means manifest in extreme skewering of results.
Laissez faire (a policy or attitude of letting things take their own course), always results in chaos, and in times of chaos, mischief thrives.
It has been said that people get and deserve the government they voted for...
I say people get the government they never voted for and for the people who do vote; undeserved.
To abstain is a vote in it's own right. The vote otherwise is positive - an endorsement. If I cannot endorse that Republican offering - IOW if I don't agree with him in substance - to what end would I lend him my endorsement?
Indeed, I shall not lend my endorsement to such a one. It is precisely the vote for the lesser evil that has put us where we are - A rabid communist in the white house, and no opposition to his agenda. Had we not spent all these years voting for the lesser evil, perhaps there would be more than a handful of spines in a Republican controlled congress to oppose him... And I would add that, by and large, the only ones who DID oppose him (and the GOPe) were those of the ideological far right.
Liberalism is not winning on merit. It is winning because it stands unopposed.
I don't see how electing a NY Yankee liberal is going to help matters in the least. Leave the liberalism to the democrats please. If you want my vote, give me someone to vote *for*.