They're whining about turn out in this election, comparing our turn out in a low grade, off-year primary to general elections in other countries:
You would never have such apathy in, say, Malta, where election turnout typically is above 90 percent. Or in many European countries, which boast of similar turnout. And then there is Zimbabwe, where about 55 percent of voters last week took part in the re-election of president Robert Mugabe — five years after the previous election was marred by intimidation and violence.
Of course, we jest in comparing elections in Zimbabwe to those in the United States. But we point to the vote in that African nation as an example of why we should be thankful for our electoral system. Sure, it's imperfect, but it remains the envy of much of the world.Of course, among others, The Model used here, Malta, uses a system of proportional representation and rank-order voting, both a much more encompassing form of democracy than that we use that forces divisive politics under the two party system.
The other model, Zimbabwe, ran by a Jim Moeller-like despot named Robert Mugabe', manufactures votes out of whole cloth to keep Mugabe' in office.
Great example, right? Of course, considering the democratian's history of urging government to disregard the will of the voters, to sue them and to fight their efforts to have issues appear on the ballot, I suppose the "Zimbabwe'" reference was a natural.
Well, I... and tens of thousands of others in this county... are not voting in the primary.
Because I, and tens of thousands of others... didn't get a ballot and have no primary race to vote on.
So, when these clowns babble:
According to a story in Monday's edition of The Columbian, Elections Supervisor Cathie Garber was anticipating a turnout of between 17 and 18 percent of registered voters. And auditor Greg Kimsey predicted that turnout would reach no higher than 20 percent. Those numbers are distressing. In a nation built upon representative democracy, the opportunity to vote remains one of our most cherished rights.You've got to wonder. Without indicating how many registered voters received ballots and using the phrase " between 17 and 18 percent of registered voters" the question, asked in the comment below the article stands: if, say, 50% of registered voters actually received a ballot, then this number is deceiving.
And wasn't motor-voter and absentee-only ballots SUPPOSED to fix all this?
There's stupid. And then there's democratian stupid. And this editorial, is that.