If that's the case, the amount of resources candidates spend trying to get people to vote is peculiar.
> If you don't vote, you're still entitled to complain but I personally won't take you as seriously because you haven't tried to affect change.
The only way I could even begin to see any validity to your point is if an election were a tie or decided by a single vote.
Usually, there are several millions of single votes working together to make it happen. But it's not like anyone's voting in aggregate.
Yes, but they are not decided by a single vote, and a single vote is all you get.
Agreed. There are plenty of ways to affect change without voting.
> the amount of resources candidates spend trying to get people to vote is peculiar.
It's not that simple. Candidates are not the only people involved in politics and voting and influencing voters.
If that's the case, the amount of resources candidates spend trying to get people to vote is peculiar.
> If you don't vote, you're still entitled to complain but I personally won't take you as seriously because you haven't tried to affect change.
The only way I could even begin to see any validity to your point is if an election were a tie or decided by a single vote.