Compulsory Voting - YES or NO?
Forum rules
Don't poop in these threads. This isn't Europe, okay? There are rules here!
Don't poop in these threads. This isn't Europe, okay? There are rules here!
- boxy
- Posts: 6748
- Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 11:59 pm
Re: Compulsory Voting - YES or NO?
Heard of a donkey vote?
If you want to make a statement by withholding your vote, a donkey says more than just not turning up (which is just interpreted as laziness or apathy).
If you want to make a statement by withholding your vote, a donkey says more than just not turning up (which is just interpreted as laziness or apathy).
"But you will run your fluffy bunny mouth at me. And I will take it, to play poker."
- Rorschach
- Posts: 14801
- Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:25 pm
Re: Compulsory Voting - YES or NO?
Yep heard of it and at most elections we have a very small number of invalid votes and that includes ones in which someone didn't make a deliberate mistake.Heard of a donkey vote?
If you want to make a statement by withholding your vote, a donkey says more than just not turning up (which is just interpreted as laziness or apathy).
Having manned enough booths in my lifetime I am aware of what goes on and most people vote even if they have no idea what they are voting about.
Like I asked... instead of compelling people to turn up and vote, would it not be better that those not wanting to vote be allowed to not turn up and vote or shouldn't those without an idea be allowed to not turn up and vote... instead of distorting the vote?
DOLT - A person who is stupid and entirely tedious at the same time, like bwian. Oblivious to their own mental incapacity. On IGNORE - Warrior, mellie, Nom De Plume, FLEKTARD
- Super Nova
- Posts: 11788
- Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 12:49 am
- Location: Overseas
Re: Compulsory Voting - YES or NO?
Flawed thinking. If you bother to turn up, you are forced to spin a couple of braincell cycles to think about who you will vote for, even if it is following a partys' preferences when you get a leaflet when you come in.Rorschach wrote:Like I asked... instead of compelling people to turn up and vote, would it not be better that those not wanting to vote be allowed to not turn up and vote or shouldn't those without an idea be allowed to not turn up and vote... instead of distorting the vote?
You are assuming that everyone that is forced to vote when they would prefer to go to the football or have another beer down the pub doesn't consider who the will vote for. To fill in the form requires thought. They are forced to make a decision, even if it is only made when pen hit the voting form.
Always remember what you post, send or do on the internet is not private and you are responsible.
- Super Nova
- Posts: 11788
- Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 12:49 am
- Location: Overseas
Re: Compulsory Voting - YES or NO?
Also, I don't understand why you think they distort the vote.....
Are you insinuating they are too stupid and their vote is distorting.
Are you insinuating they are too stupid and their vote is distorting.
Always remember what you post, send or do on the internet is not private and you are responsible.
- Rorschach
- Posts: 14801
- Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:25 pm
Re: Compulsory Voting - YES or NO?
Super Nova, Super Nova, Super Nova...
2/ Most people think they MUST follow the HTVs.
4/ If you can't make a self-informed decision and don't want to vote and aren't interested etc, etc, etc... you shouldn't feel compelled to vote.
If you'd been to as many polling booths and elections as I have you wouldn't say that.Flawed thinking.
1/ You are not forced to vote. Just get your name marked off. But most people still vote.If you bother to turn up, you are forced to spin a couple of braincell cycles to think about who you will vote for, even if it is following a partys' preferences when you get a leaflet when you come in.
2/ Most people think they MUST follow the HTVs.
3/ Some people do not make their mind up till right at the last minute and are influenced by family and friends whilst in line. These people would rather not have to vote at all. IMO they should not vote because they are clueless about issues, policy etc, etc, etc... so YES they distort the vote.You are assuming that everyone that is forced to vote when they would prefer to go to the football or have another beer down the pub doesn't consider who the will vote for. To fill in the form requires thought. They are forced to make a decision, even if it is only made when pen hit the voting form.
4/ If you can't make a self-informed decision and don't want to vote and aren't interested etc, etc, etc... you shouldn't feel compelled to vote.
DOLT - A person who is stupid and entirely tedious at the same time, like bwian. Oblivious to their own mental incapacity. On IGNORE - Warrior, mellie, Nom De Plume, FLEKTARD
- boxy
- Posts: 6748
- Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 11:59 pm
Re: Compulsory Voting - YES or NO?
Removing compulsory voting doesn't stop the stupid or ill informed from voting. It's actually easier to stir up idiots with bullshit, and get them angry enough to vote...Super Nova wrote:Also, I don't understand why you think they distort the vote.....
Are you insinuating they are too stupid and their vote is distorting.
"But you will run your fluffy bunny mouth at me. And I will take it, to play poker."
- Super Nova
- Posts: 11788
- Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 12:49 am
- Location: Overseas
Re: Compulsory Voting - YES or NO?
We agree on everything then except for
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/088ea/088ea7759fba7766ad31d85137821576f01ee2c6" alt="Image"
And the poor and the stupid who cannot use a computer can queue up to have their votes influenced while standing in line.
You should be to have your say in the future. maybe the lazy will have this as an option in the future.you shouldn't feel compelled to vote.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/088ea/088ea7759fba7766ad31d85137821576f01ee2c6" alt="Image"
And the poor and the stupid who cannot use a computer can queue up to have their votes influenced while standing in line.
Always remember what you post, send or do on the internet is not private and you are responsible.
- Rorschach
- Posts: 14801
- Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:25 pm
Re: Compulsory Voting - YES or NO?
Rusted-ons distort the vote too.
My point was... in a truly democratic system one should be allowed to not vote if one so desired, and so mandatory/compulsory voting isn't truly democratic.
I would change the system to non-compulsory voting. (not a biggy with me, except for the above point)
It should also be optional preferential. (a biggy IMO, because it prevents votes going to someone you never intended them to go to)
SN, Australia has a very high valid vote rate, I think most people will vote because they are involved and invested in their future. You should be allowed to protest by not voting. Those uninterested should not be allowed/made to distort the vote.
My point was... in a truly democratic system one should be allowed to not vote if one so desired, and so mandatory/compulsory voting isn't truly democratic.
I would change the system to non-compulsory voting. (not a biggy with me, except for the above point)
It should also be optional preferential. (a biggy IMO, because it prevents votes going to someone you never intended them to go to)
SN, Australia has a very high valid vote rate, I think most people will vote because they are involved and invested in their future. You should be allowed to protest by not voting. Those uninterested should not be allowed/made to distort the vote.
DOLT - A person who is stupid and entirely tedious at the same time, like bwian. Oblivious to their own mental incapacity. On IGNORE - Warrior, mellie, Nom De Plume, FLEKTARD
- boxy
- Posts: 6748
- Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 11:59 pm
Re: Compulsory Voting - YES or NO?
Heard of a donkey vote?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/98f65/98f653a0a40928716a5ef110b444dba6623f9b28" alt="Razz :P"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/98f65/98f653a0a40928716a5ef110b444dba6623f9b28" alt="Razz :P"
"But you will run your fluffy bunny mouth at me. And I will take it, to play poker."
- Super Nova
- Posts: 11788
- Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 12:49 am
- Location: Overseas
Re: Compulsory Voting - YES or NO?
A donkey vote or vote for parties that are clearly a protest vote like the Greens ...ha ha ha or in the UK they have the ...Monster Raving Loony Party.boxy wrote:Heard of a donkey vote?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/36369/36369e69faf11b11f54ccf8420724d104615ce28" alt="Image"
I find the arguements for far more compelling than against.
Arguments for
Compulsory voting ensures a large voter turnout. This means a victorious candidate or party clearly represents a majority of the population, not just the politically motivated individuals who would vote without compulsion. This helps ensure that governments do not neglect sections of society that are less active politically. Victorious political leaders of compulsory systems may claim a higher degree of political legitimacy than those of non-compulsory systems with lower voter turnout.
Another important benefit is that compulsory voting prevents interference with access to the vote. In a similar way that the secret ballot is designed to prevent interference with the votes actually cast, compelling voters to the polls for an election mitigates the impact that external factors may have on an individual's capacity to vote such as the weather, transport, or restrictive employers. If everybody must vote, then restrictions on voting are easily identified and steps are taken to remove them. It is a measure to prevent disenfranchisement of the socially disadvantaged. Countries with compulsory voting generally hold elections on a Saturday or Sunday as evidenced in nations such as Australia, to ensure that working people can fulfill their duty to cast their vote. Postal and pre-poll voting is provided to people who cannot vote on polling day, and mobile voting booths may also be taken to old age homes and hospitals to cater for immobilized citizens.
If voters do not want to support any given choice, they may cast spoilt votes or blank votes. According to compulsory voting supporters, this is preferred to not voting at all because it ensures there is no possibility that the person has been intimidated or prevented from voting should they wish. In certain jurisdictions, voters have the option to vote none of the above if they do not support any of the candidates to indicate clear dissatisfaction with the candidate list rather than simple apathy at the whole process.
Compulsory voting may encourage voters to research the candidates' political positions more thoroughly. Since they are voting anyway they may take more of an interest into the nature of the politicians they may vote for, rather than simply opting out. This means candidates need to appeal to a more general audience, rather than a small section of the community.
A result of this setup is that it is therefore more difficult for extremist or special interest groups to vote themselves into power or to influence mainstream candidates. Under a non-compulsory voting system, if fewer people vote then it is easier for smaller sectional interests and lobby groups to motivate a small section of the people to the polls and thereby control the outcome of the political process. The outcome of an election where voting is compulsory reflects more of the will of the people (Who do I want to lead the country?) rather than reflecting who was more able to convince people to take time out of their day to cast a vote (Do I even want to vote today?).
Political scientist Arend Lijphart writes that compulsory voting has been found to increase voting by 7–16% in national elections, and by even more in local and provincial elections and elections to the European Parliament. The large increases in turnout are found even where the penalties for not voting are extremely low. He notes that other civic duties also exist, like paying taxes, attending school and, in some democracies, military conscription and jury duty. All of these obligations require far more time and effort than voting does, thus compulsory voting can be seen as constituting a much smaller intrusion of freedom than many other activities.
Apart from the increased turnout as a value in itself, Lijphart lists other advantages to compulsory voting. First, the increase in voting participation may stimulate stronger participation and interest in other political activities. Secondly, as no large campaign funds are needed to goad votes to the polls, the role of money in politics decreases. Thirdly, compulsory voting acts as a sort of civil education and political stimulation, which creates a better informed population. Fourthly, high levels of participation decreases the risk of political instability created by crises or dangerous but charismatic leaders.[2]
Arguments against
Any compulsion affects the freedom of an individual, and the fining of recalcitrant non-voters is an additional impact on a potential recalcitrant voter.
Voting may be seen as a civic right rather than a civic duty. While citizens may exercise their civil rights (free speech, marriage, etc.) they are not compelled to. Furthermore, compulsory voting may infringe other rights. For example, most Jehovah's Witnesses and Christadelphians believe that they should not participate in political events. Forcing them to vote ostensibly denies them their freedom of religious practice. In some countries with compulsory voting, Jehovah's Witnesses and others may be excused on these grounds. If however they are forced to go to the polling place, they can still use a blank or invalid vote.
Another argument against compulsory voting, prevalent among legal scholars in the United States, is that it is essentially a compelled speech act, which violates freedom of speech because the freedom to speak necessarily includes the freedom not to speak.[3]
Some do not support the idea of compulsory voting, particularly if they have no interest in politics or no knowledge of the candidates. Others may be well-informed, but have no preference for any particular candidate, and have no wish to give support to the incumbent political system. In compulsory voting areas, such people may vote at random simply to fulfill legal requirements: the so called donkey-vote may account for 1-2% of votes in these systems, which may affect the electoral process. Similarly, citizens may vote with a complete absence of knowledge of any of the candidates, or deliberately skew their ballot to slow the polling process or disrupt the election.
Another group opposed to compulsory voting are principled nonvoters. They believe that the political process is inherently corrupt and violent, and prefer to minimize their personal involvement with it. If one adheres to Murray Rothbard's view of the state as a "gang of thieves writ large" then compulsory voting is a form of conscription into the largest mob with the biggest guns.
Supporters of voluntary voting assert that low voter participation in a voluntary election is not necessarily an expression of voter dissatisfaction or general political apathy. It may be simply an expression of the citizenry's political will, indicating satisfaction with the political establishment in an electorate. Former Australian opposition leader, Mark Latham, urged Australians to hand in blank votes for the 2010 election. He stated the government should not force citizens to vote or threaten them with a fine.[4]
LInk: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting
In fact, if the people skew the voting then your argument devalues their vote. See the argument for where that is not the case.
This sort of opinion is retrograde. Why don't we go back to only men voting because women only do what the men tell them... hell we will only let women vote if they own property or raise the age since 18 year olds don't have enough life experience to be entitled to an opinion or if you are stupid or too fat you should not vote.
I think the argument that being compelled to vote skews the result of a flawed argument and the sort of position I expect from upper class twits who think they know what is good for the population.
Rorschach are you an upper class twit?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/70de5/70de519147d0edb4d10d655b350c724a9e809901" alt="Image"
Always remember what you post, send or do on the internet is not private and you are responsible.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests