"Voting" with the Non-Voters an alternative approach

Elections are an elaborate charade that diverts the public's attention while the elite pick their pockets. It is extremely successful, as almost everyone believes the fairytale that voters hold the power.

<snip>

Those who are aware of the elite's power and refuse to buy in to their slick game feel the solution is to choose a principled third party candidate who cannot be controlled or bought off. Third parties have come and gone. None ever won the presidency or a small chunk of the Senate or House. No third party during the entire history of the country was able to make much of a dent.

<snip>

Every vote, whomever it is for, is a ratification of the established order. It implies that the voter approves of the system and will abide by its results. The system obviously stinks, but by utilizing it voters endorse it.

<snip>

Join the largest party of all. A party that always outnumbers the winner's total. A party that not only rejects the two major parties but the edifice that supports them and the entire crooked system. It is time to throw out the bath water and Rosemary's baby as well. Rather than expend time, effort and money on creating a third party to appeal to a small fraction of the electorate, it should be expended to keep more people from the polls.

<snip>

http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_13610.shtml

so instead of wasting time and money on candidates that wont get elected, pool the potential independant voters and get them to...not vote? I know the premise is that "every vote... is a ratification of the established order", but what good is not voting going to do? If we could get enough people to not vote, like seventy five percent of the population, then it might be a clear demonstration of the people's disgust. But, a. i dont think enough people could be persuaded and b. they would just say the dam liberals are apathetic and unpatriotic. thats my take on it.