Compulsory voting?
10 February 2015, 06:21 PM
#31
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In the fast lane
Posts: 3,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even if I accepted that all no-voters were abstainers rather than predominantly morons (with a minority of abstainers) then these abstentions tell the politicians absolutely nothing of any value.
Whereas a vote for 'None of the Above' would tell them plenty.
'None of the Above' should be on the paper whatever.
Whereas a vote for 'None of the Above' would tell them plenty.
'None of the Above' should be on the paper whatever.
10 February 2015, 06:27 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And if it is then please explain why having to select 'None of the Above' at the Village Hall, by post or online rather than doing nothing (or abstaining as you call it) is such an affront to your democratic rights?
10 February 2015, 06:29 PM
#33
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: I'll check my gps
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not going against democracy and peoples freedoms. We are told every day how fast we can drive, what we are, and are not, allowed to say to others and so on. People need order and to be given direction in a civilised society. Giving people responsibility and holding them to account doesn't undermined anything.
In a ideal world no one would need to be told what to do.
In a ideal world no one would need to be told what to do.
10 February 2015, 06:31 PM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not going against democracy and peoples freedoms. We are told every day how fast we can drive, what we are, and are not, allowed to say to others and so on. People need order and to be given direction in a civilised society. Giving people responsibility and holding them to account doesn't undermined anything.
In a ideal world no one would need to be told what to do.
In a ideal world no one would need to be told what to do.
10 February 2015, 06:32 PM
#35
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not going against democracy and peoples freedoms. We are told every day how fast we can drive, what we are, and are not, allowed to say to others and so on. People need order and to be given direction in a civilised society. Giving people responsibility and holding them to account doesn't undermined anything.
In a ideal world no one would need to be told what to do.
In a ideal world no one would need to be told what to do.
10 February 2015, 06:51 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In the fast lane
Posts: 3,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Compulsory voting cannot occur in any way unless 'None of the Above' or similar is an option.
And if it is then please explain why having to select 'None of the Above' at the Village Hall, by post or online rather than doing nothing (or abstaining as you call it) is such an affront to your democratic rights?
And if it is then please explain why having to select 'None of the Above' at the Village Hall, by post or online rather than doing nothing (or abstaining as you call it) is such an affront to your democratic rights?
Making voting compulsory with a 'none' option achieves nothing more, and without doubt cannot be described as a part of a democratic procedure.
It is, however, the stuff of dictators.
10 February 2015, 07:01 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is disenfranchisement.
We don't need mandatory voting, we need better, more engaging politics and politicians.
Mandatory voting might make you feel better, but it won't address the route cause of voter apathy - whilst chcuking away some esssential freedoms.
We don't need mandatory voting, we need better, more engaging politics and politicians.
Mandatory voting might make you feel better, but it won't address the route cause of voter apathy - whilst chcuking away some esssential freedoms.
10 February 2015, 07:06 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not going against democracy and peoples freedoms. We are told every day how fast we can drive, what we are, and are not, allowed to say to others and so on. People need order and to be given direction in a civilised society. Giving people responsibility and holding them to account doesn't undermined anything.
In a ideal world no one would need to be told what to do.
In a ideal world no one would need to be told what to do.
I don't need the feckin government telling me what I have to do. I lend them my vote if and when I choose.
As F1 said earlier, the big issue is the electoral system - that, more than anything else, disenfranchises people by its very nature you end up with utterly pointless votes. Change that, then I'd be open to ways of encouraging more people to vote.
Last edited by Martin2005; 10 February 2015 at 07:08 PM.
10 February 2015, 07:23 PM
#45
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If, as you suggest, the addition of a 'None of the Above' option would tell politicians what they need to know, how is that any different to a percentage of the electoral roll not appearing at the polls? It is after all just a matter of very simple maths to find out how many abstentions there have been.
Making voting compulsory with a 'none' option achieves nothing more, and without doubt cannot be described as a part of a democratic procedure.
It is, however, the stuff of dictators.
Making voting compulsory with a 'none' option achieves nothing more, and without doubt cannot be described as a part of a democratic procedure.
It is, however, the stuff of dictators.
And please explain how simple maths can differentiate between the abstainers (who might just as well vote 'None of the Above') and the simpletons (who might just as well vote 'None of the Above')?
10 February 2015, 07:25 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is disenfranchisement.
We don't need mandatory voting, we need better, more engaging politics and politicians.
Mandatory voting might make you feel better, but it won't address the route cause of voter apathy - whilst chcuking away some esssential freedoms.
We don't need mandatory voting, we need better, more engaging politics and politicians.
Mandatory voting might make you feel better, but it won't address the route cause of voter apathy - whilst chcuking away some esssential freedoms.
10 February 2015, 07:26 PM
#47
Thats mandatory, and a hell of alot more boxes to tick.
Oh, and of course its illegal to not fill in a voting registration form. So we have the right not to vote, but not the right to be unregistered
10 February 2015, 07:31 PM
#48
Current politics won't change until they are told and forced to realise that the majority of the public think they are crap.
All they are doing is trying to win a majority of those who are arsed to vote.
If the 60-70% of those that don't vote had their hand forced....Politicians would soon realise they'd need to pander to a totally different demographic!
All they are doing is trying to win a majority of those who are arsed to vote.
If the 60-70% of those that don't vote had their hand forced....Politicians would soon realise they'd need to pander to a totally different demographic!
10 February 2015, 07:31 PM
#49
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is it that you are so against having to vote? Do you regard having to select 'None of the Above' as depriving you of your symbolic abstention? Or maybe you aren't on the Electoral Roll because you want to be anonymous. Have you got something to hide? After all, it is nothing if not a minor inconvenience once every 5 years if G.E. only.
And please explain how simple maths can differentiate between the abstainers (who might just as well vote 'None of the Above') and the simpletons (who might just as well vote 'None of the Above')?
And please explain how simple maths can differentiate between the abstainers (who might just as well vote 'None of the Above') and the simpletons (who might just as well vote 'None of the Above')?
10 February 2015, 07:56 PM
#52
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In the fast lane
Posts: 3,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is it that you are so against having to vote? Do you regard having to select 'None of the Above' as depriving you of your symbolic abstention? Or maybe you aren't on the Electoral Roll because you want to be anonymous. Have you got something to hide? After all, it is nothing if not a minor inconvenience once every 5 years if G.E. only.
My argument against compulsory voting is well made and founded on basic democratic principles.
I have said my piece and stand by that.
10 February 2015, 09:25 PM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This suggestion (flippant or otherwise) completely nullifies your entire argument in defence of compulsory voting.
As you seem so intent on completely ignoring the basic premise of the argument based on basic democracy I shall refrain from fuelling your irrational 'flippancy'.
My argument against compulsory voting is well made and founded on basic democratic principles.
I have said my piece and stand by that.
As you seem so intent on completely ignoring the basic premise of the argument based on basic democracy I shall refrain from fuelling your irrational 'flippancy'.
My argument against compulsory voting is well made and founded on basic democratic principles.
I have said my piece and stand by that.
Not voting under the current system is acceptable, although whether an individual does so with purpose or ignorance is unknown.
Not voting when 'None of the Above' is an option, whether compulsory or otherwise, is ignorant in all cases.
And, to all those who rattle off the excuse of 'They're all the same anyway so what's the point', that deserves nothing but contempt. Your vote has been well-earned (maybe not by you) and should be used whenever possible.
10 February 2015, 10:15 PM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only part of my previous post that was flippant in any way was the section highlighted by my friend. The rest in its entirety was completely serious and your standpoint is still flawed as far as I am concerned.
Not voting under the current system is acceptable, although whether an individual does so with purpose or ignorance is unknown.
Not voting when 'None of the Above' is an option, whether compulsory or otherwise, is ignorant in all cases.
And, to all those who rattle off the excuse of 'They're all the same anyway so what's the point', that deserves nothing but contempt. Your vote has been well-earned (maybe not by you) and should be used whenever possible.
Not voting under the current system is acceptable, although whether an individual does so with purpose or ignorance is unknown.
Not voting when 'None of the Above' is an option, whether compulsory or otherwise, is ignorant in all cases.
And, to all those who rattle off the excuse of 'They're all the same anyway so what's the point', that deserves nothing but contempt. Your vote has been well-earned (maybe not by you) and should be used whenever possible.
I really don't understand the point of insisting (by law) that people vote.
10 February 2015, 10:23 PM
#55
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only part of my previous post that was flippant in any way was the section highlighted by my friend. The rest in its entirety was completely serious and your standpoint is still flawed as far as I am concerned.
Not voting under the current system is acceptable, although whether an individual does so with purpose or ignorance is unknown.
Not voting when 'None of the Above' is an option, whether compulsory or otherwise, is ignorant in all cases.
And, to all those who rattle off the excuse of 'They're all the same anyway so what's the point', that deserves nothing but contempt. Your vote has been well-earned (maybe not by you) and should be used whenever possible.
Not voting under the current system is acceptable, although whether an individual does so with purpose or ignorance is unknown.
Not voting when 'None of the Above' is an option, whether compulsory or otherwise, is ignorant in all cases.
And, to all those who rattle off the excuse of 'They're all the same anyway so what's the point', that deserves nothing but contempt. Your vote has been well-earned (maybe not by you) and should be used whenever possible.
You can treat it with all the contempt you like, but it does not change the fact they are all the same and this has been proved over the last 35 years beyond any reasonable doubt.
Put simply they are lying cheating self serving pigs at the trough who don't deserve my vote or me even stirring to get off the couch and come and spoil my ballot paper.
When they do something for the genuine good of the country rather than the good of themselves, when they stick to major manifesto promises, when they stop fiddling their expenses, when they stop wasting our money on illegal wars and stupid public enquiries only needed because of their ineptitude and that only ever conclude with the phrase 'lessons will be learned', when they stop trying to buy the popular vote with the promise of referendums that will never happen, when they implement ****ing Leveson like they promised... well then I'll get off my backside and vote for one of them! Until then they can go and stick their ballot papers where the sun don't shine and I don't mean Manchester!
10 February 2015, 10:41 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let me put this to you: when those who vote have their votes counted, those votes WILL decide directly (or indirectly if a hung parliament, but nowt we can do about that) who next will govern this country. The Government will be a 'box' on that ballot paper. It may be that one finds little to relate to in any of the party manifestos, but they are different and ultimately one manifesto will be less disagreeable than the others. And on that basis, better that one votes for the least bad than nothing at all.
10 February 2015, 10:43 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No worries then I'll vote for Miliband
You can treat it with all the contempt you like, but it does not change the fact they are all the same and this has been proved over the last 35 years beyond any reasonable doubt.
Put simply they are lying cheating self serving pigs at the trough who don't deserve my vote or me even stirring to get off the couch and come and spoil my ballot paper.
When they do something for the genuine good of the country rather than the good of themselves, when they stick to major manifesto promises, when they stop fiddling their expenses, when they stop wasting our money on illegal wars and stupid public enquiries only needed because of their ineptitude and that only ever conclude with the phrase 'lessons will be learned', when they stop trying to buy the popular vote with the promise of referendums that will never happen, when they implement ****ing Leveson like they promised... well then I'll get off my backside and vote for one of them! Until then they can go and stick their ballot papers where the sun don't shine and I don't mean Manchester!
You can treat it with all the contempt you like, but it does not change the fact they are all the same and this has been proved over the last 35 years beyond any reasonable doubt.
Put simply they are lying cheating self serving pigs at the trough who don't deserve my vote or me even stirring to get off the couch and come and spoil my ballot paper.
When they do something for the genuine good of the country rather than the good of themselves, when they stick to major manifesto promises, when they stop fiddling their expenses, when they stop wasting our money on illegal wars and stupid public enquiries only needed because of their ineptitude and that only ever conclude with the phrase 'lessons will be learned', when they stop trying to buy the popular vote with the promise of referendums that will never happen, when they implement ****ing Leveson like they promised... well then I'll get off my backside and vote for one of them! Until then they can go and stick their ballot papers where the sun don't shine and I don't mean Manchester!
