system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
I don't think it's bad that many people don't vote, because it means the votes of those who are informed and committed count for more. CMV

If someone doesn't vote, surely they either don't know enough about the issues for their vote to be worth anything anyway, or they don't have any issues that they see any party can solve. So their vote isn't going to be very considered, and is more likely to be chosen based on superficial factors.

For each person like this who doesn't vote, the impact of the vote of someone who does care and is knowledgeable is magnified. And surely this is a good thing.

Personally I'm glad when people don't vote because it means my vote counts for more.

EDIT - I'm in the UK and talking from a UK perspective, but also interested in perspectives from elsewhere.

EDIT 2 - I'm only including those for whom voting is not anymore of a challenge than for the average person in the 'don't care if they don't vote' category.
gpt
Apathetic, largely centrist voters are a good check against ideologically driven voters. If the majority of people voting are those with rigid views who strongly favor one side, then candidates have more incentive to campaign with less moderate views to appease their party and prevent a primary challenge. This is one driver of polarization.

Moreover, there's no reason to believe that the average voter is knowledgeable, or that this 'knowledge' is even a good thing. Someone raised a die-hard conservative and listens to talk radio every day would probably do better on a political quiz than a self-proclaimed nonvoter, but if the latter were forced to vote then they would probably put more reasoning into their decision than the former. Remember that in the US, voting is more or less zero sum, there are "informed" people who support both candidates and it's a 50/50 shot for every "uninformed" person, so it's not like their vote can do any damage.