MikeL

My Feedback: (3)

Nope. Two separate things. The first is assigning a moral value to voting in an AMA election. It isn't a good thing or a bad thing to do. It's not a moral issue. It's simply a personal preference that doesn't reflect negatively or positively on a person. If it did, the vast majority of AMA members would be bad members. In my view, the only bad members are those that knowingly put the hobby at risk through behavior that reflects poorly on us all.

The second thing is that I've seen some people equate voting in an AMA election to voting in a civic election. To me, that's rather silly, to say the least. The AMA is a private group that provides a framework for a hobby. It isn't the US government. Then again, some of those same people also attempt to interject American politics into AMA politics. That's pretty stupid, too.

I think we've all got the right to do bothto vote and to spout off. Whether I've voted for a particular candidate that won, a candidate that lost, or no candidate at all those that are elected still are responsible to AMA members. To suggest that AMA leadership is only responsible to the tiny minority of AMA members that vote is irresponsible, in my view.

Stickbuilder

How does getting up and going to work in the morning help preserve your's or anyone else's right to vote?

The nice thing about living here in the US is that we have the right to voice our opinions about something which may or may not be of our own business.

And of course the whole premise of this thread is whether it's OK for a voting member of the AMA to just decide not to vote. Of course it's solely to the discretion of the member whether he/she chooses to vote or not, but that's not the question the OP asked, is it?

[/quote]

Bob,

He does not really get up and go to work....He's out on the Frontier.

Bill, AMA 4720

Bob Mitchell

I think it's an apathetic thing to do, and unfortunately most members of AMA are apathetic. Now the question becomes: Is being apathetic bad.

Seems to me the same apathy is at work, though.

Agree with that.

And.......don't spout out about not being able to vote if you joined as a non-voitng member.

I agree that AMA leadership is responsible to ALL members. OTOH, to me it's more than a bit hypocritical to not vote and then complain about what you get.

Blue_Sky

From your perspective your statement seems true to you, but in fact it's a false statement.

People fight for freedom to ensure freedom for everyone, including the freedom to dissent. It simply goes with the territory of protecting individual freedom and it's something mature people do.

You can bitterly argue with someone and state your point, but you have to defend their right to say what they believe. As I said, it goes with the territory.

calachie

This is about the AMA - isn't it ?

Jim Thomerson

I do vote in AMA elections. I have belonged to organizations where I didn't care who was in office and thus did not vote. I regard it as a duty to vote in governmental elections.

804

My Feedback: (1)

I can't equate voting or not as a member of an enthusiast org., to voting or not in a government election.
But since the discussion is about AMA, I'll say I have no problem with members not voting.

I'm interested in the type of leadership we elect, but I can't expect every AMA member to share that interest. It's just not realistic, nor any of my business.

Bob Mitchell

It's not false at all. I can't keep someone from freely expressing their opinion, (and wouldn't try) but can certainly be of the opinion that they shouldn't be. That's what I said, basically.

Do you remember the famous phrase that I paraphrased early in this discussion? "I may not agree with your choice not to vote, but will defend to the death your right to do so".

Blue_Sky

You can't have it both ways. In the above quote you’re saying: My opinion is they “certainly� shouldn’t be expressing their opinion. Oh really? What should people do if they have an opinion? Just shut up because you think they should?

On one hand you say people shouldn’t be expressing an opinion because it doesn’t agree with you, and on the other hand you say you wouldn’t keep someone from freely expressing their opinion.

At this point I could deliver hundreds of different sentences to you, some forbidden by the rules of the forum and some encouraging you. I’ll choose instead telling KE it was a great topic, good job.

It’s great because people checked in and voted in the poll with an alignment that does not fit the two sides of the fence we’ve seen in the past 30 days. KE is a very good forward thinker and I thank him. I wish I had that ability, but I’m stuck reacting.

calachie

Since this is about the AMA I will say this again.
We don't have to vote but if you can't (because your not a voting member) or don't vote(because you don't want to) then you have no say in what goes on.

Bob Mitchell

Edit:

Re-read my quote above, and then the words you bolded in your response. Do you not realize they aren't the same thing? You are re-arranging what I said, and then disagreeing with your re-arrangement. Saying (my words now, not your take on them) "....but can certainly be of the opinion that they......." is NOT the same thing as saying (your words that you are trying to put in my mouth) ".....they 'certainly' shouldn't be expressing their opinion."

If you don't see the difference in what I said, and what you tried to change it to then the subtlety of this whole discussion is being lost on you. There is a huge difference between preventing someone from saying something, or saying that they should be prevented, and saying they "shouldn't" say it. The very use of the word "should" makes it an opinion, doesn't it?

End Edit

The conundrum here is that you're telling me I shouldn't be expressing my/this opinion.

My OPINION is that they have the choice to vote or not, and should freely exercise that choice. My other OPINION is that they are wrong in selecting the latter and if they DO select the latter and then P&M about the results, they are wrong again. It doesn't mean that they can't, doesn't mean that I think they should be prevented from doing so. It does mean I think it's wrong. Simple as that. That's certainly not "having it both ways", Blue Sky.

Again.....did you read my paraphrase of one of the founding fathers?

Then why mention it? That's kinda like saying "it goes without saying that I disagree with you".

I think it was/is an interesting topic also.

Or mis-reacting, as in this case.

704hank

My Feedback: (1)

Bob
I do not believe what is going on here!!
It dependes on what IS IS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GOD HELP US WE NEED YOU NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!![sm=drowning.gif]
HANK

MikeL

My Feedback: (3)

If a person votes for the losing candidate, do they have any say in what goes on?

DavidAgar

My Feedback: (108)

Mike, yes they do. Dave

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

An uninformed vote is an irresponsible vote. It is based on zero knowledge.
Are you with me so far?
Most votes are uninformed, unless the voter has decided to hire a detective agency to check up on the candidates and devote his life to researching what all the candidates stand for, plus learning about their past performance.
Are you still with me?
Based on your logic, any blithering idiot who votes in favor of the guy who kissed his baby or maybe shook his hand at "Top Gun" has a valid say in what goes on, but an individual who realizes that all he is capable of casting is an ignorant vote, so he does the responsible thing and doesn't vote......this guy has no say?
Your statement above speaks clearly about your powers of reason.

calachie

Now let me say that if I don't like what the person I voted for is doing I have the right to complain. And if I don't like what the person I didn't vote for is doing I have the right to complain. But if I didn't vote at all then No I don't have the right to complain.

Are you with me?

The Toolman

CP, Your beatin' a dead horse with this guy, so I guess I'm gonna hafta give you the award this week

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

Thankyou, thankyou. I accept this award on behalf of all the other dead horse beaters who have tirelessly crusaded for common sense and sober reason.

Calachie, uhh..I guess I shouldn't have tried to use any abstract or metaphorical examples with you. I'm sorry if it was too much. []

Stickbuilder

(long sigh)(Borrowed from Robotech)

Bill, AMA 4720

calachie

Excuse me I forgot where I was. I didn't realize that I was in the AMA Expert & Know it all Forum.

Stickbuilder

Well, now you know.

Bill, AMA 4720

MikeL

My Feedback: (3)

Not at all. You're attempting to say that a right is tied to a decision to vote or not. What you're doing is ascribing how you feel about voting to someone else's right to be displeased with an organization they belong to. Remove your emotion from it, and you'll no longer see any connection between voting and complaining. Why? Because there simply is no connection between the two.

Jim Thomerson

I'm in the if you are a member, and don't vote, you have no right to an opinion corner. I don't think anyone has a inborn right to an opinion. Right to an opinion is earned through thoughtful consideration of the matter. Oddly enough, I can see where someone not a member could have a legitimate opinion about the organization.

The Toolman

What about the people that don't like either one, so they don't vote at all. Does that mean that they shouldn't have a say in what goes on, an how things are run? As long as they are a member, I believe they still ought to have the right to complain.

804

My Feedback: (1)

If this individual is responsible enough to realize he is too ignorant to vote for a candidate to represent his views(and that is what we are voting for, not directly on the issues), then why should that same responsible person feel he should have any "say", as you put it?

Power of reasoning?

The truth is there are very few who would not vote because of the reason you stated.