Low Voter Turnout
In Praise of Low Voter Turnout
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: The article was written in 1992, basically saying that the fight over ideologies was done, cold war was over, and we were ending the 20th century with America on top. Compare that to today, we compete with China, and Washington fights over ideologies are the greatest they’ve ever been. It’s beneficial for our country when some people don’t vote because it is important for a candidate to be properly chosen rather than many people voting just to vote. Many people are not properly educated throughout the political competition. For example, many young adults get their information from the media such as television or radio. Therefore, not many follow the political views of each and every candidate.
MAIN POINT OF ARTICLE: Charles Krauthammer’s main point is that there is not an issue with some people not voting. The low voter turnout is beneficial for our government.
UNDERSTANDING OF THE ISSUE:
IS THERE A PROBLEM WITH VOTER TURNOUT? There is not a problem with low voter turnout because that would signify that educated people voted. It is better for the people who don’t care about politics not to vote because if they would vote there is a chance they could jeopardize the outcome. There is no point in voting if they did not take the time to learn about or care about the issues in the society. For example, let’s say that people are voting whether or not guns should be illegal. If most people who are serious about politics voted that guns should be illegal and let’s say the other people who don’t take it seriously voted that guns should not be illegal, then there would be a big problem.
WHAT COULD BE DONE ABOUT SUCH A PROBLEM? There could be more education in schools for younger adults in college and high school about politics. More specifically, candidates can approach young age groups at schools and talk about the important issues going on around them.
HOW DO OTHER COUNTRIES APPROACH THIS PROBLEM? Political
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: The article was written in 1992, basically saying that the fight over ideologies was done, cold war was over, and we were ending the 20th century with America on top. Compare that to today, we compete with China, and Washington fights over ideologies are the greatest they’ve ever been. It’s beneficial for our country when some people don’t vote because it is important for a candidate to be properly chosen rather than many people voting just to vote. Many people are not properly educated throughout the political competition. For example, many young adults get their information from the media such as television or radio. Therefore, not many follow the political views of each and every candidate.
MAIN POINT OF ARTICLE: Charles Krauthammer’s main point is that there is not an issue with some people not voting. The low voter turnout is beneficial for our government.
UNDERSTANDING OF THE ISSUE:
IS THERE A PROBLEM WITH VOTER TURNOUT? There is not a problem with low voter turnout because that would signify that educated people voted. It is better for the people who don’t care about politics not to vote because if they would vote there is a chance they could jeopardize the outcome. There is no point in voting if they did not take the time to learn about or care about the issues in the society. For example, let’s say that people are voting whether or not guns should be illegal. If most people who are serious about politics voted that guns should be illegal and let’s say the other people who don’t take it seriously voted that guns should not be illegal, then there would be a big problem.
WHAT COULD BE DONE ABOUT SUCH A PROBLEM? There could be more education in schools for younger adults in college and high school about politics. More specifically, candidates can approach young age groups at schools and talk about the important issues going on around them.
HOW DO OTHER COUNTRIES APPROACH THIS PROBLEM? Political