This is ofc a rhetorical question as you can see the answers play out very clearly in nearly every conservative party in the world (and much more subtle and convoluted in the parties left of them).
Voting against their interests: nothing. That said, I've often found folks deemed to be voting against their interests to be doing nothing of the sort.
Those who don't care are, for me, also fine. They're self selecting out of having a voice. If they want to have one in the future, they can engage. The tragedy is those who want to engage but can't. Due to registration requirements, ersatz poll taxes, difficulty of getting to and from poll sites or keeping tabs on the election calendar.
(Apathy is unlikely to be solved with reforms versus education. I've never met an apathetic voter who cast a blank ballot in protest. If they show up, they tend to find something to vote on.)
I hear about this every now and then, but is it an issue in any real number? Maybe the problem of the "difficulty of getting to and from poll sites", which I can see arising due to the nature of this country being large, spread out, and automobile-centric.
Even Georgia, which was recently under fire for so-called voter restriction laws, hands out voter ID cards for free or a non-driver state ID card for under $40 that lasts nearly a decade. I can only imagine that anyone who is unable to obtain one of those has much bigger problems than voting every few years.
For example, at one point a proposal was floated to force changes in Texas polling center distribution, but only in counties with over a million people, which was pretty nakedly partisan. https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/23/texas-voting-polling...
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/06/01/harris-county-electi...
It's not just distance and cost, but time. Someone working 3 jobs simply doesn't have time to stand in line for hours.
> Someone working 3 jobs
According to the BLS[0], less than 5% of working-aged people hold more than one job, and presumably a fraction of that have three jobs. Surely society shouldn't optimize for a small minority of the population.
> doesn't have time to stand in line for hours
Data on this isn't great, but one source I found[1] puts a cursory total average across all states in 2020 at around 15 minutes, with the worst average wait time being Indiana at 42.1 minutes. It's confirmed by a 2020 academic paper[2] which puts the nationwide median at 14 minutes.
I can imagine that there are outliers who have to wait unpleasantly long, and that same paper referenced above indicates that people may have unequal voting wait times based on where they live. Ideally voting should be easy for all those eligible to vote.
[0]: https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat36.htm
[1]: https://www.lgbtmap.org/img/maps/citations-polling-place-lin...
Having a permanent, of sorts, attachment to a location incentivizes people to vote to protect their interests in that location.
Even the so-called "left leaning" party are landlords.
We are run by the landed gentry. They'll continue looking out for their own. Houses are the safest asset as they're practically 100% Government backed.
Homeowners, irrespective of age, tend to vote more. This is in part enabled by material comforts. But there may be other layers of causation. The first two are problematic per se (though I'm uncertain of the effect size). But the last is simply fundamental to democracy--if someone can vote but can't care to, they're not going to have their interests represented.