Why vote? Why waste time casting a ballot that has no influence? Why bother choosing between two nearly identical candidates?

Voting is not meaningless. Those we elect into power do listen. Yes, some voices are disproportionally louder (enter public financing), but a critical mass of people giving a shit can overcome. SOPA & PIPA were famously defeated by people using their voices.

Government is the embodiment of the people who participate. It is an emergent property of our will. It's not about individual votes, but the collective choices and interaction of those participating. That government is of the people, by the people, and for the people is the driving idea behind Code For America.

Steve Jobs had a similar realization:

We are free to choose how our government works, and it even has built-in procedures for doing so. We are free to participate and be our government. Voting is the minimum participation for changing government. The process is far from perfect, but sitting on the sidelines is the surest way to not matter. Even for those completely disillusioned by the process or the candidates, frustrated by how similar they can be (skip to 2:30), there are other choices, and options like a write-in or protest vote. Imagine if a candidate lost to “Donald Duck” or “None of the above”; that would be a powerful signal of dissatisfaction. Voting is the first step to closing the feedback loop .

In the 2012 general election, nearly 5% of Nevada voters cast ballots for “None of these candidates” for Senate.

The act of voting isn't a cathartic exercise, or choosing between a douche and a turd sandwich. It's about paying attention and participating. Contrary to what the media may present, voting is much more than just picking between Obama or Romney for president. There are many more candidates running, and deserving of support. And then there are the state and local offices and issues. California has 11 state ballot propositions in the November election. Thinking there are only two options is largely why there are only the douche and the turd sandwich in many elections. (Enter instant runoff voting, and again public financing.) It's not impossible for new parties to gain traction. A branch of the nascent Pirate Party recently achieved having a senator in Czech government.

Part of me actually hates voting on a national level because it does feel ineffectual. But, I know that not participating is ineffectual. Voting is the least you can do to change the problem. Actively contacting representatives and attending local council meetings is even better. Voting is the gateway to that.

There are many who are actively changing democracy, and enabling others to participate: The Sunlight Foundation, Lawrence Lessig and the Rootstrikers movement, and Dana Chisnell and the Field Guides to Ensuring Voter Intent, just to name a few.

(Chisnell gave a great presentation last night on ballot design and usability at the NYCUXPA meetup. Closing the event, Gloria Petron noted how cool it is that we can have projects like the Field Guides or meetups like that one that are free to talk about these issues. Seriously cool .)

Admittedly, under participation is in many ways the fault of those who do participate and see it working for not better illuminating success. It's very much the responsibility of those who participate to encourage others to do so. Also, the plea for others to vote is somewhat selfish, because not voting devalues the vote of those who do participate.

However, the cynics need to get past the idea that their voices don't matter and that voting is ineffectual, even if they don't live in a high ROI place. The value of a vote is multiplied by other votes. Voting is a way to say “I'm a part of this country. I have a stake in how it works. I am helping to decide its direction.” The more voices we have, the stronger we are.