Interesting. I realize I'm asking you to spitball, and that's fine legitimately curious to hear something outside the box but why do you think that is?
Seems to me an unlikely division when it comes to voter participation, or at least a very unexpected one.
On the other hand, friends not in tech (much more varied population by job; artists, food-service & bar industry, construction, medical) were much more motivated to tell me not only what their opinions were, but how they were voting (or had already voted) and why.
It's possible that this will change nearer to the mid-term, but it doesn't seem like primary elections get people that excited.
It's a great question though, and I'll start asking more deeply about it because I'm curious now as well!
Last night I stumbled by a group of older (than me, all clearly retired) folks talking about Unions at my local pub. Interested, I sat down and quietly listened in-they didn't seem to mind.
At one point though I spoke up about how surprised I was that we haven't seen more tech workers unionizing in areas that aren't San Francisco, Cupertino or Austin. The "leader" of the pack so to speak,went on to talk about all of the amenities tech giants offer like day cares and dog parks on campus, laundry facilities etc and then he capped it off with "but none of that stuff pays your rent in San Fran".
Bringing it all back around, I do genuinely think about this sort of stuff a lot and I wonder if there's something to be said of a tech culture that gives it's employees so much that they passively lose something that binds us all to the connective tissue of citizen engagement.
I only bring it up because I've noticed the exact same phenomenon you have: lots of very smart, well paid tech friends who confessed to not even bothering to vote despite very huge opinions about everything political and an even larger eagerness to display their "wokeness" on social media.
It's my poorer blue collar and service industry friends I see online asking for rides to the polls, and are the ones who ask ME "did you vote today?"
When you have the income to:
1. Rent a comfortable apartment pretty much anywhere in the Bay Area, without fear of rising rent displacing you. (Keep rent within a third of your income)
2. Pay for a private solution (Rideshare, Private commuter buses, tech company shuttle) to the broken transportation infrastructure, dirty streets, and the homeless problem of the Bay.
3. Have a fiscal safety net in case something happens to your income.
4. Have the insurance needed to withstand the occasional curve-balls of life.
then you've mostly averted the endemic problems of the Bay Area. SF's gov't is incompetent, and private solutions have alleviated most of its systemic issues for its moneyed classes. Of course people in tech won't be as motivated to vote, they're insulated from all of the problems.
There's a growing sentiment (growing being an understatement, Google/Apple buses have been smashed/blocked for years now) that tech's private market solutions are priced to only help their own out. Until this perception changes, they're going to want to vote with their rage.
One of the reasons for it, is that in cities with working transit, both the rich, and the poor, newcomers and decades-established people take the bus/train. When people with influence are using public transit, it stops being shit.
Pointing at Muni, and saying: "Look, you fools! Public transit doesn't work!" is a bit like pointing at Somalia, circa 2009, and saying: "Look, you fools! Rule of law doesn't work!"
Another being that community organizers and concerned citizens were sufficiently disenfranchised and disempowered that greedy developers obtained permission to destroy pre-existing communities, open space, and neighborhood character to create built environments that are dense enough for good public transit to be cost-effective. In some cases, this happened more than 1000 years ago, so no one minds anymore.
>When people with influence are using public transit, it stops being shit.
Is there any evidence for this? Has a population ever actually forced its leaders to ride shitty public transit, and subsequently seen a turnaround?
Most New York professionals rely on the subway, and it's falling apart anyway.
Probably straying close to striking the heads off of poppies by saying this but it's a real concern I have while simultaneously wanting to see my hometown thrive.
Weird spot to be in.
Go here: http://registertovote.ca.gov/
They will mail you a confirmation of registration. Once you receive that confirmation convert yourself to a permanent vote-by-mail voter.
--
San Francisco Permanent Vote By Mail:
1. Go here: http://sfelections.org/tools/regupdate/regupd.php
2. Enter your details, then check the "Become a permanent vote-by-mail voter" checkbox.
3. Click Print, then Save to PDF. Attach your signature electronically (or print it, sign it, and scan it with your phone)
4. Email the PDF to SFVote@sfgov.org
--
San Jose Permanent Vote By Mail:
1. Go here: https://www.sccgov.org/sites/rov/VBM/Pages/Permanent.aspx
2. Print the form and fill it out
3. Mail it to the address indicated
--
San Mateo Permanent Vote By Mail:
https://www.smcacre.org/vote-mail
--
Now you're set. They will mail you a ballot in the mail for every election. You mark the cards, put them in the envelope, and drop them in the mail. You usually have ~3 weeks to research each proposition and candidate.
If you live in a different county you'll have to check with them how to become a permanent vote-by-mail voter, or use the state form and mail it to your county registrar: http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov//vote-by-mail/pdf/vote-by-ma...
This micro-level rationality leads to a big problem on the macro level. People who see politics as a matter of principle aren't likely to be swayed by the low RoI of going to vote. They'll exercise their democratic rights, come hell or high water. You end up with an electorate that is disproportionately driven by principles and ideals rather than pragmatism.