Rage Against the Machine_ Why we (the people) won't vote _ Columns _ montanakaimin
1. 8/18/2016 Rage Against the Machine: Why we (the people) won't vote | Columns | montanakaimin.com
http://www.montanakaimin.com/opinion/columns/rage-against-the-machine-why-we-the-people-won-t/article_7049898d-9e2f-545c-a1e6-ac6fc6f7db07.html 1/3
http://www.montanakaimin.com/opinion/columns/rage-against-the-machine-why-we-the-people-won-
t/article_7049898d-9e2f-545c-a1e6-ac6fc6f7db07.html
Rage Against the Machine: Why we (the people) won't vote
Cassidy Belus Oct 10, 2012
PREVIOUS
I'm taking tranny back
Whenever kids don't like something that's good for them, adults figure out a way to trick them, like
blending vegetables into smoothies. Sneaky bastards. Just when you think it's safe, you read the
label and BAM! You're drinking broccoli.
The non-edible, less tasty version of this is voting. Remember in 2008 when all your favorite
celebrities threw down the "Yes We Can" music video and you kind of wondered if they ran out of
material for actual songs, but still downloaded it and liked Obama on Facebook? Forty-six percent
of 18- to 29-year-olds found the time to vote in the 2008 election.
The magic is gone. I mean, celebrities can keep turning out hilarious videos for us because we
need some good Facebook material, but seeing Samuel L. Jackson endorse Obama just makes me
want to vote for Samuel L. Jackson.
Obama, Romney, here's the thing: Your campaigns have become jokes. We've made drinking
games out of your presidential debates. No, our age group has never been known for voting. But
Obama, you got 46 percent of us to care four years ago. Now we're unimpressed and looking for
other options. Meanwhile, third parties are kept out of presidential debates. They don't have the
airtime or the corporate backing to compete.
2. 8/18/2016 Rage Against the Machine: Why we (the people) won't vote | Columns | montanakaimin.com
http://www.montanakaimin.com/opinion/columns/rage-against-the-machine-why-we-the-people-won-t/article_7049898d-9e2f-545c-a1e6-ac6fc6f7db07.html 2/3
I already know I won't vote for Romney. One, his religious zeal worries me. Two, he looks like the
counterpart to a Stepford wife and that equally makes my skin crawl. But that doesn't mean Obama
can just relax and let the votes roll in. Give us a reason to re-elect you, please. Or better yet, give
people a reason to vote for you in general. There are those who look at both options and go "eh,"
and "eh" does not usually translate to voting.
We're statics as voters. That's not new for this age group. Most of us don't own houses, worry
about retirement or have much money in general (Thanks, rising tuition!). Maybe it's the view that
whoever is elected won't affect us, or maybe it's that we have no idea how to fix things.
Unemployment is high, corporations are gaining power and tuition is soaring. The country is divided
by partisan lines and fighting instead of reaching a solution.
In 1978 when Harvey Milk ran for San Francisco's city supervisor, he said something that bears
remembering: "You gotta give them hope."
Former Sen. Russ Feingold spoke to the University Monday about how people experience a loss of
power as corporations continue to gain privileges. Corporations now have the freedom to give
money to campaigns without a cap. I don't have enough money at this point to buy jeans without
holes. I can't compete with AT&T or Microsoft.
They're taking the power from us, and we've gone from ignoring the problem to scrambling to fix it.
We need to start simple by focusing on local politics and moving up. I know those campaign signs
are annoying, but electing the right people at the local level is a good step toward fixing
government as a whole.
Overall: Should we vote? Duh. Are the right presidential candidates running? Eh.
cassidy.belus@umontana.edu
Features
'Hashtag May 14th': Missoula College grad's journey to Montana