I think they can complain if they like. It just might be that if they DID vote things would be worse.

I like to hear all opinions and complaints. An idea not fully explored is incomplete no matter if these idea explorers voted or not. It might just be the frustration of these vocal complaints that finally push them to vote, so I say complain and suggestively rant people will listen (at least I will) and give their rebuttals and that is the discourse of the formation of our democracy.

I vote at every opportunity I get and I guess that makes all this mess my fault.

Sure, everyone has the right to speak out and say what they need to if they believe something should change, whether they have voted or not.

However, I believe that people who don't vote are doing themselves and their country a disservice.

Democracy - as in this case the right to vote without threat of violence or retribution - is a privilege. We should know this by now! If anyone has the ability to be heard and counted and help society by voting then they should do so. At times there seems no real choice ( I know that ) but to abuse your right by avoiding a responsibility is a loss for everyone.

Voting is sending a message, not voting is making no choice and no, the only message you are sending is "I don't really care enough to bother". I don't care how much you donate to local charities, I don't care how kindly you look after sick animals. If you can't be bothered to vote, I get your message - it means you're not interested in my community.

Politics is power whether we like it or not. If we all opt out of being responsible we are letting the crooks and celebrity-politicians win. We let the vocal and disruptive minority groups take over the process that really should deliver equality, not segregation and distrust.

A true democratic government makes voting compulsory, so every citizen must participate in some way. You can write what you want on the ballot - but turn up and have your say you must.

Who you voted for does not have to be disclosed, and I'd argue that whether you voted or not should sometimes be kept private as well. So, to answer your question, I think it should be accepted by the general public that people who don't vote should still have a voice. There is also a large group of people who, a year or more into the term, also regret voting for the candidate they chose. It's conceivable to think that, at least occasionally, there are those who vote and later wish they hadn't.

I've thought about whether or not it would be possible to get everyone to stop voting because we are essentially voting for one of 2 or 3 crooks. When I vote, I don't vote strictly for whoever is running in whatever political party I consistently support because I don't consistently support one party over the other. I vote for who I think is the lesser of 2 evils. Between 2004 and 2008, I voted for candidates from both sides. Voting is almost an empty practice now because, while you're passionate about your choice at the time, there is always a moment or two when you become disappointed in not only yourself, but the person you chose. I understand the mentality of those who don't vote, though. Most of them think that it doesn't matter whether or not they vote because they believe the system is corrupt through and through.

So what would happen if no one voted? Would the corrupt government then make the decision? Would there still be a president? Would this even still be considered America? Regardless of the corruption in our government, we as a people still have a responsibility to vote. Even if all we are voting for is the lesser of 2 evils. At least, in my mind anyway, we trying to choose less corruption over more.

As you point out, your Freedom of Speech right is enshrined in our constitution, and nowhere does the constitution require voting as a prerequisite for the right to speech. Having said that, it can be validly argued that while you have the legal right to speak and/or complain, regardless of your voting or not, your moral right to object to what the government does is diminished when you abstain from exercising your right to influence who the government is.

If nobody voted (which is as close to impossible as human affairs go) there would likely be a complete breakdown of the electoral process. A new campaign might be staged, with probably at least the non-incumbents dropping out and being replaced by other candidates from the same party or parties. Until that process is completed, the incumbents would likely need to stay on in office as lame duck president, VP, etc. In any case, the likelihood of this happening is so low, that claiming you abstain from voting in the hope of bringing this about would tend to paint you as hopelessly naive or worse, depending on the person passing judgment.

If you believe the candidates from both major parties are evil, corrupt, and/or incompetent, you have several options.

1. Run for office yourself.
2. Encourage someone else to run, who you feel would be worthy of the office in question.
3. Vote for a write-in candidate (where possible).
4. Vote for a third party candidate you feel you can support (as you indicate you now do).
5. Vote against the candidate you feel would be the worst of the two major party candidates.

The above list is in descending level of difficulty and personal involvement, and increasing level of likely practical impact, given our system of government.