“The Republicans won the house again, and not because they were voted in. It was because too many people didn’t vote.”
Well. Clearly they were voted in, otherwise they wouldn’t have won the house again.
“Winning the house” is pretty much synonymous with “being voted in”.
Are you suggesting that the non-voters are mostly Democrats too lazy to vote for the party that they really support?
What if half of them would have supported the Republicans anyway?
Maybe the Republicans were genuinely more popular, and the voters who turned out are actually an accurate representation of their support.
Voting isn’t really that rational. An individual’s vote makes effectively no difference to the outcome. Yet voting takes some degree of time and effort to do, and even some probability of actual harm—perhaps an accident on the way.
Coupled with the fact that an individual vote makes no realistic difference to the outcome of an election, we also have to consider that government in the US is actually dominated by oligarchic and elite interests regardless of which party is in power.
I did vote (only the second time in 20 years) in the recent UK general election. I voted for a candidate who had no chance. My reasons were the following:
The polling station was literally 2 minutes walk away.
The weather was quite nice.
I was curious to see if there were any changes in the voting process since I first voted in a local election aged 18. It hadn’t. We still use paper and pencil to mark an X.
My vote had a tiny contribution to possibly save the candidate’s deposit. She was 2% short and lost it anyway.
It may well be the last time I ever bother again.