Yes of course it matters. Is it sufficient? Probably not. But it’s a substantial improvement over not being able to e.g. protest the government.

Anyway, our government isn’t designed to be steered by protest but by voting, which despite all its flaws does shift inertia.

> isn’t designed to be steered by protest but by voting

Even voting within states are completely rigged with gerrymandering and popular vote means nothing in national elections.

This is a disingenuous pattern of argument. You point out a known problem and then throw the baby out with the bath water. In this case, its clear voting does have some effect because seats are constantly changing parties, and parties fiercely compete for votes.

Other similar examples of this argument:

"Everyone knows taxes go to corrupt corporations, they are completely useless get rid of them"

"Everyone knows masks dont block 100% of airflow, theyre completely useless!"

What seats are changing party? I live in California where my vote counts the least. Since I turned 18 every single election has sent a Democrat to Washington for both senate seats and my representative and president (though California doesn't have final say on that last one).

Currently, of those 4 seats, 3 are in their high 70s or even 80s and the 4th was appointed by the governor.

I'm in my 30s. My interests are either entirely not, or very very poorly represented in Washington.

Tell me again how my never missing an election has made a difference?

What seats are changing party: In November there are 50 tight races for house seats alone. The house and senate play a huge role in legislation so this election will have massive impact.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-election-forecast/...

Even if you live in WA/CA your vote still matters. At the federal level there are 4 elected positions, 14 at the state level, and more at a local level. There are also primaries, so even if your Governor is guaranteed to be a Democrat you can at least pick which one.

The people that do vote have an outsized impact because, like you, most Americans are too lazy to vote.

I clearly said in my comment that I've never missed an election.

I do also vote in primaries, those have typically gone opposite to how I voted, or else were a foregone landslide for my pick.

I also never implied I live in WA. Apparently you got confused because I spelled out the name of the capital city of this country.

Ah, apologies for misreading your comment.

I see your point that district style voting can feel pointless unless you you're in a swing district. I still think there are smaller positions you can influence over but I agree with you on that.

> seats are constantly changing parties, and parties fiercely compete for votes

Possibly because those seats are worth money. I don't know that people competing for them means voting 'works' in any definitive fashion.

Princeton recently released a study (this one[1], I think?) that basically says as much: voting does very little.

1 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli...

If voting doesn't matter, why do Republicans work so hard to prevent voting?

It depends on where you live. Some states your individual vote will not matter because the outcome has already been decided by the popularity of one party.

If you vote for the biggest offices and nothing else. There's a lot more on those ballots.

There is, and my vote will also not influence those based on where I live.

> voting

You cannot meaningfully vote in the US, you have two options that have similar fascist views of the rest of the world and are unlikely to change anything. That is a false choice, meant to lull the chooser into a false sense of agency.

Yep it’s an imperfect system. It’s dramatically better than a lot of others that have existed through history (including today) though.

It is simply wildly untrue to imply that the two major parties don’t hold opposing views on at least a few important topics or that voting doesn’t help determine which party holds the power to realize their worldview. There’s a lot of overlap and a lot of ineffectiveness but this does not make them the same.

I thought this was incredibly obvious, but when you are not inside the US it becomes a lot more clear that it's foreign policy or stance on human rights doesn't change. It doesn't matter who you have in charge. What US news reaches outside of the borders frankly also doesn't convince me it's the same clusterfuck year after year. It wasn't always like this - it's gotten a lot worse in the past twenty years that I've paid any attention to it.