willman Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 i'd like all people who don't offer a vote or make an attempt to spoil the paper, to be banned from discussing the current governments political policies. if u cant be bothered to a)support them or b) vote them out, why should anyone listen to you. proportional rep. should be introduced,politics should be all that is discussed prior to an election not personal lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 an attempt to spoil the paper can be seen as a protest "none of the above" vote when such an option isn't available. It's a valid opinion that they wish to vote, but can find no candidate that they wish to vote for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willman Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 an attempt to spoil the paper can be seen as a protest "none of the above" vote when such an option isn't available. It's a valid opinion that they wish to vote, but can find no candidate that they wish to vote for. i agree dont think my post read correctly. people should vote or spoil the paper, not abstain. think that sounds better. i offer a spoiled paper every local election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 sorry, yeah, i misread it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodger Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 I'm in two minds about it really. On one hand, you should be free to exercise choice: vote or don't vote. On the other, you hear people complaining about some political news and then state that they didn't vote! I remember watching the news and seeing the lines of people in one of the African sates queueing up to vote-some having walked miles. I just think that we take our right to vote lightly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 The sooner we have a benign dictatorship the better! I'll be standing - who'll vote for me? (I only kiss babies BTW) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don_Kiddick Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 The sooner we have a benign dictatorship the better! I'll be standing - who'll vote for me? (I only kiss babies BTW) Oh aye? You'd better Pucker Up then Pal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 Look at the US where turnout is even lower than here. You see Bush voted for by only 25% of the population, and he wins. We shouldn't want our elections to be dominated by people with extreme views who always vote as a result of those extreme views. Tony Blair at the last election got back on a vote of just of just 22% of the electorate so he's less entitled to be our president than Bush is in the US on the basis of how many people voted for him. The general apathy about politics here is the persistent failure of the parties to fulfill the promises they make in their pre-election manifestos, and extremism isn't an issue any more because all three main parties here are fighting over the same middle ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yodameister Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 Aside from the philosophical considerations, how do you practically enforce it? Frogmarching people to the polling booth is not exactly going to make anyone feel particularly more engaged with politics. I'd not vote as a point of principle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banesmabes Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 Tony Blair at the last election got back on a vote of just of just 22% of the electorate so he's less entitled to be our president than Bush is in the US on the basis of how many people voted for him.. It's a good thing he's not our president then Our system certainly isn't perfect. With first past the post and a large third party we are never going to have a government that has over 50% of the votes cast, never mind the support of 50% of the population. That's why PR and compulsory voting should be considered. The general apathy about politics here is the persistent failure of the parties to fulfill the promises they make in their pre-election manifestos, and extremism isn't an issue any more because all three main parties here are fighting over the same middle ground. My point about extremism was that if the turnout for elections continiues it's downward trend then the extremists voices will become disproportionately more influencial, because they will remain most likely to vote, whilst the moderates stay at home. We haven't reached that point yet, but we may get there one day if nothing is done about voter apathy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.