08-10-2005, 06:58 AM | #1 (permalink) |
Lover - Protector - Teacher
Location: Seattle, WA
|
Would you support "None of the above.." on a ballot?
This was raised by a poster in another thread, and although it might have been a bit tongue-in-cheek, I actually wonder if it is feasible. Would you support a ballot that contained a "none of the above" type answer? That way, anyone who "refuses to vote" can actually be tallied and given a representative figure on vote counts. Maybe then politicians could see how many people were unconvinced by their platform or their stand on certain issues. Likewise, it would allow for much more accurate counts of how many people actually aren't voting.. I think if people were given the option to disagree with the candidates and still feel like they've "voted", it might satiate a lot of the more rebellious among us. The reason I'm less inclined to vote is when I feel like neither of the candidates have an agreeable platform --- perhaps this would also inspire smaller parties (Greens, etc..) after seeing the number of non-voting voters.
Good idea? Stupid idea? Whatcha think..?
__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel |
08-10-2005, 07:42 AM | #2 (permalink) |
will always be an Alyson Hanniganite
Location: In the dust of the archives
|
I vote Libertarian. What do you think?
Seriously...no. Why? Because...well, let's take a look at this past presidential election as a perfect example. With the (let's face it) two candidates, that we had to choose from, ...what if "None Of The Above"...actually won?
__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony "Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt. Last edited by Bill O'Rights; 08-10-2005 at 07:44 AM.. |
08-10-2005, 07:52 AM | #3 (permalink) | |
Lover - Protector - Teacher
Location: Seattle, WA
|
Quote:
__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel |
|
08-10-2005, 09:34 AM | #4 (permalink) |
Addict
|
Having a "none of the above" option would just provide people with another way to make their vote count for nothing. Unless your disdain for every candidate is exactly equal, throwing away your vote like this wouldn't make any sense.
__________________
The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty |
08-10-2005, 09:47 AM | #5 (permalink) |
Unencapsulated
Location: Kittyville
|
But when the choices are pretty awful, why choose the "lesser of two evils"? I like the idea of telling the parties pretty solidly that no, we don't like the bullshit you're serving at the banquet this year. Do better.
__________________
My heart knows me better than I know myself, so I'm gonna let it do all the talkin'. |
08-10-2005, 09:53 AM | #6 (permalink) | |
Addict
|
Quote:
Floridian Nader voters, 2000
__________________
The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty |
|
08-10-2005, 10:46 AM | #7 (permalink) |
Unencapsulated
Location: Kittyville
|
If they'd had a "none of the above" to choose, who knows how different our country would be right now? Impossible to say for the good or for the bad, but it would be a change. I think we NEED a change.
__________________
My heart knows me better than I know myself, so I'm gonna let it do all the talkin'. |
08-10-2005, 10:57 AM | #8 (permalink) |
Junkie
|
This is interesting-what if the "none of the above" option worked like no confidence votes in many parliments-where the current leaders must leave their positions. So if that option won on a ballot, the parties would have to nominate someone else. The logistics of this might not work, but I think that would show the current main parties how dissatisfying many of their current nominees for office are.
|
08-10-2005, 01:16 PM | #9 (permalink) | |
Pickles
Location: Shirt and Pants (NJ)
|
Quote:
Sounds good to me. My only problem is that chances are the president at the time would have to stay in office during the time it takes for another election to take place. I don't like that part. And considering that people may not vote for any party's FIRST choice, the odds of them picking the second choice is even more slim, thus keeping the sitting president.. sitting... cuz someone would have to do it. Can't just kick out an entire branch of government w/o replacing it. (or can you.. hmm.) I would rather see it made easier for more people to get on the ballot in all the states. Some parties have a hard time getting enough states to win even if people did suddenly begin voting for them.
__________________
We Must Dissent. |
|
08-10-2005, 01:34 PM | #10 (permalink) | |
Insane
Location: Vermont
|
Quote:
|
|
08-10-2005, 02:10 PM | #11 (permalink) | |
Omnipotent Ruler Of The Tiny Universe In My Mind
Location: Oreegawn
|
Quote:
It's sort of the political equivalent to the question "If a Tree falls in the middle of the forest, and nobody is around to hear it..." Or, perhaps it's more apt as Gary Larsen put it, ""If a Tree falls on a mime in the middle of the forest, and nobody is around to hear it, does anybody care?"
__________________
Words of Wisdom: If you could really get to know someone and know that they weren't lying to you, then you would know the world was real. Because you could agree on things, you could compare notes. That must be why people get married or make Art. So they'll be able to really know something and not go insane. |
|
08-11-2005, 11:25 PM | #13 (permalink) |
Sky Piercer
Location: Ireland
|
Over here in Ireland, we briefly introduced electronic voting. It was seen as very important that such a system included the ability for a voter to 'spoil' their votes. I would support the inclusion of a 'none of the above' ballot, although I would probably never use it.
__________________
|
08-12-2005, 12:23 AM | #14 (permalink) |
Upright
|
its certainly an interesting option, although i dont like the idea of someone staying in office while the parties mill around for a replacement... what people should do is find a candidate they like, no matter what party, and convince their friends to vote for that candidate. Hell, theres no rule saying a third party candidate cant win... its just kinda a natural grimace at that title. I dont think a vote of "none of the above" would be that great, although I do like it when compared to the vote of no confidence across the pond...
|
08-12-2005, 03:19 AM | #15 (permalink) |
Free Mars!
Location: I dunno, there's white people around me saying "eh" all the time
|
What about the possibility of having no president? But instead, have a head of state figure elected by the congress or senate and directed by them?
The Senate and Congress is elected by the people, thus, it's possible that the head of state figure is more likely to follow the general will of the people than the president himself. On the other hand, a party could dominate the senate and congress and could use it to control the head of state.
__________________
Looking out the window, that's an act of war. Staring at my shoes, that's an act of war. Committing an act of war? Oh you better believe that's an act of war |
08-12-2005, 12:04 PM | #16 (permalink) |
Insane
|
We do have a 'none of the above' option. Even on electronic ballots here in Texas, we have the option to decline to vote for any of the available candidates. It is called an undervote. I in fact encourage everyone to undervote elections in which they do not actually know the candidates or have a specific reason to support a particular one.
Undervotes are counted, and are noticed by candidate operatives. If an election gets an abnormally high rate of undervotes, it is taken as a sign of voter dislike for the involved candidates. The same is true of elections where a third party candidate does inexplicably well. These are not written off to apathy, since these are people that took the time to go to the polls and vote, but specifically declined to support either candidate in a particular race. We also of course have the option of writing in someone, as those in San Diego are quite aware. I thus see no reason to add a specific 'none of the above' option to the ballot. Josh |
08-12-2005, 12:29 PM | #17 (permalink) | |
Upright
|
Quote:
thats exactly what I think would happen if the head of state was elected by congress. Also, lets look at the chain of command... congress rights the bills, and the president aprroves or vetos them. So essentially the seanate and house would be electing someone to approve thier bills! |
|
08-21-2005, 02:47 PM | #21 (permalink) |
Minion of the scaléd ones
Location: Northeast Jesusland
|
I frequently support none of the above on the ballot, but I vote for the Democrat anyway because he will be less evil than the republican in most cases.
__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns. Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life. |
Tags |
ballot, support |
|
|