Actually they are--it is one thing to shout your political beliefs from the highest mountain but if you can't be bothered to pull the lever than all of that shouting falls on deaf ears.
I have to admit that I was quite surprised and lost a measure of respect for you after reading your statement.
Gee, I'm crushed. Maybe I finally realized that voting was nothing more than an exercise of one group we'll call majority using the force of a 3rd party to make another group we'll call minority to do and conform to a type social and customary lifestyle that if left to choose on a purely voluntary level, they would not choose to do for themselves. Majority want Obamacare, minority doesn't, the State at the business end of a gun will force the minority to the majority's will. At some point, the roles reverse and the otherside gets to point the gun. But not matter what, who from election cycle to election cycle wins in the whole process? Why does it never get better but in fact get worse? Even pure luck would suggest a screw up in favor of the people every once in a while!
Another way to think of this is the majority is the master, one who makes all political determinations, the minority is the servant, or one who sacrifices his own self determination to conform to that of others and then the taskmaster, the one who forces compliance from any who dare stray from the master plan. Why should I give my approval to such as system by taking part and at some point maybe even being a part of the majority and using force on others to conform to my will? Diesel's point about Slavery which some made fun of was vastly closer to the truth than any of us want to admit.
50% on average of actual voting age public do not vote election to election. You might get a spike in a single election because of an igniting issue or candidate, like him or not but Obama caused a spike up for example (and what has really changed?), but across the years, the averages tend to hold in that range. Both parties know this and in each cycle they try with all their heart to make the otherside into villians and if they can make into even bigger villians than they really are in the eyes of that non voting 50%, some of them just might jump in the fray and then be the difference taking the minority into majority status.
But here's an interesting gem especially for those here who love to flap the constitution around and even the organic constitution especially is that prior to the 14th (1868') and 15th (1870') amendments, there was no direct mention of the right to vote or for that matter citizenship. From the POV of the constitution, there was no such thing as a citizen or voter and the closest the organic constitution comes to even mentioning what some might construe as a voter, is Article 1, Sec. 4 which only authorizes to the individual States to hold elections in order to choose members of Congress from those states but the Congress retains the right to modify those state regulations and methods at their will. In otherwords, the state could choose to determine who their members of Congress are by walking into any bar and pull out 5 drunks from which they will choose that State's members of Congress. I contend those drunks would also do a better job of picking Congress than the current method of mass public elections and just the odds of pure luck could easily prove that point. Everyone crows about the brillance of the men who wrote the constitution and yet in their brillance of wisdom, they never considered voting and citizenship all that important to even make it a foundational point in the organic constitution. Wonder why that is?
Lastly, did you ever once consider that voting and politics is a form of marketplace just as going out and buying a car or a washing machine. If I choose to instead of buying a car to walk everywhere I need to go, would I be attacked for not buying a car? Or buying a washing machine verses rainwater in a rainbarrel? Granted the car and washing machine are more efficent in time and labor and not making that choice might seem weird, but as long as I attempt not to impose my belief on others, it's considered a act of personal liberty and freedom for me to make those choices. Voting is the same thing as you are entering a marketplace and choosing one product over another but what if one thinks no product offered is worthy of their time and labor converted to a monetary unit and in this market the currency is in the form of a vote. If someone in the purely economic market saves their money, they are said to practice the virtue of thriftiness. In electorical politics, I'm just being thrifty!
Also I love contrarian POV's that challenge people to think outside the box in which they normally live!