feebmaster? No, I think that a turnout of less than half would signify general approval of the status quo. If the incumbent is bad, or if someone really good comes along, every one should get off of their duff and vote. The reason people say they do not vote is because the differences in candidates is so minor as to make no difference. That, in my opinion is approval for the incumbent. (A major "home field" advantage always goes to the incumbent in an election, because his name is known.)
I admit to being of radical opinions. My voteing for judges is a sample of that. In Kansas we do not vote for judges, we vote against them. The ballot reads "Should judge John Doe be kept in office?" I vote no, for each and every one, because I think our judges free to many real criminals and jail too many minor offenders. A blanket disapproval as I see it.
Politicians are paid to represent us, and make the laws we want. Many of them are responsive to the masses, because they want to be re-elected. Many of them do not know what the masses want, because we do not tell them. With phone calls, or email, or snail mail, or most importantly with our votes.
Last paragraph removed, I got detoured onto the wrong road.