Eames Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Because the douchebag with the good PR doesn't win already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Which is kind of the point... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Don't really think we need a "none of the above option". I mean, you can just spoil your ballot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 25, 2014 Author Moderator Share Posted March 25, 2014 Don't really think we need a "none of the above option". I mean, you can just spoil your ballot.None of the above is different. None of the above means that if NOTA wins the ballot a new election is called with new candidates invited to stand. It has an effect. Spoiling your ballot paper has the effect of recording that you went to the polling station, thats itI'm all for NOTA, I'm not in favour of mandatory votingTotally agree. Mandatory voting with a "none of the above" option on the ballot papers. But then a great heap of people would vote 'none of the above' and any douchebag with decent PR would win.Not if NOTA won the ballot 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Fair enough. I agree with you on mandatory voting. I think it's a terrible idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 If you have mandatory voting, then you need a 'none of the above' option, otherwise you are effectively saying people have no choice but to vote for established parties. I'm not totally against mandatory voting, because I think politics is too important to simply ignore or be apathetic about, but I do think people should have the freedom of choice. In any case, Australia has mandatory/compulsory voting and wound up with that dickhead Tony Abbott, so it doesn't change much! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) So mandatory voting is only ok if it produces leaders you like? I'm not defending Tony Abbott by the way. Truth be told I don't know much about him. Edited March 25, 2014 by Mantis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 NOTA wins and you have another round of voting and then another and another until eventually some independent who says the things people want to hear wins. Then that independent has basically no backing or power in Parliament other than to make up numbers. I get the idea that people want to show their dissatisfaction officially on a ballot paper and maybe there should be a way to do it but this just won't achieve anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Read what I wrote again and if you still think that's the point I was making, I suggest taking a long nap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Reiterating the same point I made before when we had this exact discussion. Also with the same people saying the same things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 25, 2014 Author Moderator Share Posted March 25, 2014 NOTA wins and you have another round of voting and then another and another until eventually some independent who says the things people want to hear wins. Then that independent has basically no backing or power in Parliament other than to make up numbers. I get the idea that people want to show their dissatisfaction officially on a ballot paper and maybe there should be a way to do it but this just won't achieve anything.Oh shit, independents in parliament, what a terrible idea. Sounds like how democracy should be to me 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) Even independents will often form into voting blocs. Read what I wrote again and if you still think that's the point I was making, I suggest taking a long nap. No need to be patronising. What was your point then if not that? It seemed to me as if you were criticising the mandatory voting system they have in Australia partly on the basis that they elected someone you don't like under said system. Edited March 25, 2014 by Mantis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Independents are fine but realistically what difference can one person standing alone make in Parliament? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 It seemed to me as if you were criticising the mandatory voting system they have in Australia partly on the basis that they elected someone you don't like under said system. The point (regarding Abbott) is that mandatory voting doesn't necassarily lead to change, because countries that have it (Australia, Brazil, Singapore) haven't exactly rocked the boat with who they have elected. My own criticism of mandatory voting is more to do with freedom of choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) Fair enough, but maybe the majority of people simply don't want radical change? Edited March 25, 2014 by Mantis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 25, 2014 Author Moderator Share Posted March 25, 2014 Independents are fine but realistically what difference can one person standing alone make in Parliament?Democracy should be about every representative of the people standing alone and representing his / her constituents. Parties and their machines are the death of democracy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 I don't know anything about politics. If voting is mandatory would that not mean that uneducated people like me would spoil the vote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Independents are fine but realistically what difference can one person standing alone make in Parliament? Democracy should be about every representative of the people standing alone and representing his / her constituents. Parties and their machines are the death of democracy Can't disagree with you there but how would it work? 650 people standing for different things. Nothing would get done, for better or for worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) Parties or party-like structures are inevitable though. It's natural for people to group together because they share like-minded views or to advance a common cause. Edited March 25, 2014 by Mantis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) I don't know anything about politics. If voting is mandatory would that not mean that uneducated people like me would spoil the vote? You have all the information at your fingertips, do some research and educate yourself Edited March 25, 2014 by AVFCforever1991 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts