Mandatory voting

[Silver]

I've never bought into the idea that it is our civic duty to vote. If one is voting just to say they've voted, that's as bad or worse than not voting. Voting is for people that actually have an opinion on what is being voted upon.

I am against mandatory voting.

Considering that I do not vote, I agree with your post.

[Mister Agenda]

Not voting is indistinguishable from being happy enough with the way the country is being run that you wouldn't lift a finger to try to change it in any direction. I don't want my thoughtful vote drowned out by a bunch of yahoos who could care less which button they push.

[Minimalist]

I've already said the ballots should have a none option, but I'll take that a step further. If the nones end up with a majority of the vote then why not disqualify the current candidates and have another election?

Look at the collection of republicunt fuckheads in the Congress and state legislatures NOW. What you suggest would be so much worse.

Besides, rich motherfuckers will still buy the new legislators as soon as they are sworn in. The only solution to this problem is to make lobbying illegal....and drag a few lobbyists out to the national mall and fucking burn them at the stake to ram home the point.

[Silver]

My basis for not voting is that I do not care for any of the chosen candidates, and writing in my own candidate would be useless.

Most voters erroneously believe there is a distinct difference between democrats and republicans, when the reality is that both parties are owned by the same corporations.

[Dystopia]

I'm against mandatory voting - In my opinion it is the duty of a concerned citizen to vote at least as a blank vote if you're against the system, however I don't think coercion is the answer - I do think abstention is troublesome specially in Europe, but mandatory voting is not the answer. Brazil is an example of mandatory voting. One of the main arguments, in my opinion, against mandatory voting is that ignorant people who aren't concerned with the system will inevitably vote poorly and sometimes extremist parties gain votes

If it is the duty of a concerned citizen to vote then why shouldn't it be mandatory?

I've already said the ballots should have a none option, but I'll take that a step further. If the nones end up with a majority of the vote then why not disqualify the current candidates and have another election?

I distinguish between civic duties and legal duties - The latter are the ones you should do because the law says so, such as not killing or raping, the former are duties that, in my opinion, people should exercise but not coerced.

The only argument I can think of that is valid is the following - Sometimes a lot of people don't vote, and as a result (at least it happens in Europe) politicians are elected by 40-50% of the population, and since everyone votes for different parties some politicians only have the support of 20-25% of the population - This violates the principle of democracy because in theory the majority didn't vote for the current government.

I'm just trying to lay out the pros and cons, but why do you think specifically that it should be mandatory - What benefits do you see?

[popeyespappy]

The only argument I can think of that is valid is the following - Sometimes a lot of people don't vote, and as a result (at least it happens in Europe) politicians are elected by 40-50% of the population, and since everyone votes for different parties some politicians only have the support of 20-25% of the population - This violates the principle of democracy because in theory the majority didn't vote for the current government.

I'm just trying to lay out the pros and cons, but why do you think specifically that it should be mandatory - What benefits do you see?

Voter turnout in the US for the 2014 election cycle was less than 37%.

The benefit would be forcing a change of leadership. As others have pointed out that might not be good but something needs to be done. The last time the US congress had an approval rating above 50% was 2003. They have been running at less than 20% since 2011. Most Americans think congress is doing a shitty job and major changes need to take place. That doesn't happen though because most voters think their individual representatives are doing a good job. It's everybody else that is fucked up. Maybe forcing people to the polls will get some new people up there.

[AFTT47]

This is like leading the proverbial horse to the water. You might be able to force them to vote but you can't force them to vote their informed opinion. I always vote because I believe it certainly does make a difference but if I didn't feel that way and I was dragged into a voting booth against my will, I sure as hell wouldn't give my vote much thought. I might vote at random or deliberately choose a stupid candidate like whoever is running as a Nazi. That doesn't serve the process and it would be an afront to the voters who do put in the time to make an informed decision. Just a very bad, stupid idea.

[vorlon13]

Yeah, because poor people don't need a voice.

Rarely remarked upon, for reasons mysterious to me, that was how the country was set up originally.

What were the founding fathers thinking ?? It doesn't jibe with the equality stuff any better than the slavery concept did either, but there it is.


(my post was intended to start a discussion on that, hence the panic smilies whirling beneath)

[c172]

I just plain like voting. I like walking into the ballot station and giving my name, having them look me up, give me the ballot, me ducking into the booth and doing my thing. I get excited about it. Unfortunately, at the end, I always feel a bit disenfranchised no matter how well I prepare.

[Ravenshire]

That doesn't happen though because most voters think their individual representatives are doing a good job. It's everybody else that is fucked up.

Or, maybe, it's that people believe that Wall St. will continue running the country no matter who gets voted in.

The idea that an individual vote matters is mere illusion.