> People are powerless to do anything unless 100% of them vote
I'm not following this logic? Why do we need 100% of people to vote?
I assume you mean to "oust ineffective elected officials" but I suspect that there are many people that don't vote because they are "happy" and don't feel at risk of their desired official being outed. But again, I might be off base. Hoping you can clarify more of what you meant.
Most of the public cares about climate change and wants the government to do something. The overwhelming majority of the public supports abortion in some form or other. If they actually voted maybe we could change things, but lots of people just don't vote.
Having participated in several cycles of political organizing, the actual ground game is Get Out The Vote (GOTV): not trying to get people to change their minds, but getting people to just get off their asses.
> Most of the public cares about climate change and wants the government to do something
Most of the public cares about climate change and wants the government to do something so long as it doesn't cost them anything (Or more precisely, more than 10 $/mo)[0]. Or you can just see the consternation about gas prices right now to predict how well any climate change related regulation that actually materially affected carbon production would go.
Many people don’t vote because they’re skeptical that their vote can affect anything — either because they’re in a definite minority in their legislatures or they think elections are bought, in a “changing minds” sense.
I'm not following this logic? Why do we need 100% of people to vote?
I assume you mean to "oust ineffective elected officials" but I suspect that there are many people that don't vote because they are "happy" and don't feel at risk of their desired official being outed. But again, I might be off base. Hoping you can clarify more of what you meant.