[furball]

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

So if 3 people voted that would be OK? You're not in the least bit interested in why people aren't voting?

Turnout's an obvious issue, but people don't vote for a number of reasons. Some are apathetic towards the idea of voting, regardless of their political affiliation. Others choose not to vote because they can't bring themselves to vote for any of the candidates - thus my examples of Clinton and Brownback.

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

You are basically admitting that US democracy is a worthless sham then?

What. The. Hell.

(strawman)

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

AS I said the general leaning in each state is that neither of the main parties is satisfactory, why are you blind to this fact?

I'm blind to this fact? Says who?

60.7% of the US electorate voted in the presidential election in 2004, with around 60% of the electorate voting for either a Democrat or a Republican. That suggests that a majority of voters feel able to vote for one of the main parties. You could even say that the general leaning in each state is that the main parties are satisfactory.

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

Its like watching 5 players walk out onto a football pitch for each team. I nudge you and ask why there are only 5 players each and you say, oh well it doesn't matter the absent 6 players aren't affecting the game. I say that they could play if they wanted to and you ignore me and get into a detailed analysis of 5 aside football.

I've already said that these voters do affect individual elections. However, it doesn't alter the tendancy of a state towards the Democrats or the Republicans, because it's generally the same people each time who don't turn out to vote. It's like having a league where there are supposed to be (to follow your wonderful example) 11 players on each team, but only 5 ever play. If this always remains the case, then there's little point analysing the missing 6 players because everyone is playing 5-a-side football.