Update (10/22/2016): As most people are aware, Mike Rowe responded to this post on Wednesday, 10/19/2016. I posted an apology and brief explanation while I digested his response, reread his post, and came to terms with why I could have approached this topic better.
After a few days, I’ve finished collecting my thoughts in a new follow-up post. It’s a long read, but I hope it adequately explains why I wrote the unjustifiable way I did about Mike Rowe, why I owed him an apology, and why I still respectfully disagree with him over encouraging people to vote.
I also wrote it on my own site because, fair warning, it’s probably too boring for SeriouslyGuys.
For some people, an election boils down to Democrat or Republican.
For others, it’s Vote or Not Vote because, overall, politicians are no prize. They’re more like the price of living in a republic with democratically elected representation: OK, you get someone who will mostly make the decisions you want, but they’ll also be the kind of person who wants to be a decision-maker for everyone else. It’s no surprise that most of these people probably rank high on the psychopath spectrum.
So, I can understand when a common sense guy like Mike Rowe would rather not encourage people to vote. Voting is inspirational in the theoretical, Leonardo-DiCaprio-does-it sense. But when you look at the choices, it looks more like a dirty job — do you ladle out the solid chunks or siphon the ammonia-smelling liquids?
But, when Mike Rowe says that people shouldn’t be encouraged to vote because they’re probably too stupid to do so, that’s not common sense. (Rant also celebrated here, although it bogusly claims he posted it a couple of days ago.) That’s elitism, which seems out of character for the champion of the hard-working American. Continue reading