To Vote or Not to Vote

(Most) economists like to think that everybody (except themselves) act rationally. Why don't you vote? Because you think that the odds of your vote to making a change is 1 over 200 million. If some candidate would win regardless of your single vote, you'd better not vote. If that candidate would lose even if you vote for him, you'd better not vote. Better use your time for something more productive. Not voting is, to (many) economists, rational ignorance.
But this view is too simplistic. It does not take account for intertemporal investment, multiplier effect, and warm glow of satisfaction. The first two are related. You are someone who have many friends (and hopefully have comparative influence over them). Before you vote for a particular party, let your friends (and enemies, if you have some) know that you will. Make sure you reveal your preference. That's it (You can call it "indirect campaign", not really so. Journalists will call you a "vote-getter". Be it). If that candidate lose after all, you at least have invested a "trust". In the next election period, those friends, provided that you maintain your credibity, will still vote for the same party. The third one, warm glow, is a mere subjective feeling. You like a candidate or a party (same ideology, same objectives, whatever). Act of voting gives you a warm glow of satisfaction. You know that your vote will not have any significant impact. But you won't trade your voting time with another activity, especially if you can do the latter the next day with the same expected benefit with if done today (in economics classroom term: your marginal satisfaction from voting exceeds your marginal cost from sacrificing your time). This warm glow factor, I believe, is way more evident than the first two: not everybody has a "circle of influence", but everybody has "moral sentiment".
Don't just use simplified economics, especially if wrongly. Put some common sense. As Tibor Scitovsky once put it: "Only common sense and not economic science can justify taking $100 from a millionaire and giving it to beggar".