How 10% of Voters Can Rule A "Democracy"

I won't vote for McCain.

I don't know why you bothered to turn a neutral discussion into something about one of the candidates.

My post started as a comment in a blog where the writer discussed the disproportionate influence of radical Islam and Nazism over the general populations, and how small numbers of a population can control a nation.

In a course on the Constitution (back in my gaslamp days), the Professor pointed out the dangers of voter apathy, which was prevalent in that place and time. At the time, some turnouts were 17% or less.

In general, the influence of an actual voter is inversely proportional to the number of people voting. In a low turnout election, voters affiliated with a motivated special interest group, have more influence over the outcome of an election, than they would if voters with other special interest groups participated in the election.

If 11% of the population of Dillweed, PA were Venusians, and 90% turned out, along with 10% of the rest, then the Venusian candidate is likely to win.

Many folks don't quite get that. Some think that we use a majority-rule democracy. This thinking is popular in less educated areas. We use in a plurality vote system, where there is no minimum quota for a vote tally to be binding on the population as a whole. So everyone's vote *does* count.

I was just pointing that out for general information purposes but, again, you needed to throw in some vexatious comment, further affirming your self-defining role as a troll.

but a fact nevertheless, that when apathy fills our voters, very wrong things can happen to our Nation.

In Iraq, a few years back, in a polling station at about 6:00 a.m. there were over 900 voters ready to go, and they had been threaten with death if they showed up.

I am not advocating voting for anyone, but I do not want Hillary nor Obama in charge of my brothers and sisters in arms. I still remember the days when Bill was in charge, that was ugly, and we were at relative peace.