Support NeoGAF

[Do The Mario]

Yet, not every election includes initiatives on banning gay marriage. Most elections have nothing to do with stopping the government from taking away our freedoms

Also, My two cents are that we are free to do what we wish. I don't care if the Aussies HAVE to show up. Seems like a complete waste of time to me. What if you are truly apathetic to the whole political process??? What if you don't give a damn? I have a right to do what I wish. I will never be forced to go to some elementary to school to tell the government to shove the ballot up their ass. I should be able to do that by not showing up in the first place.

To those that say you should become informed on the issues. I don't want to. I hate politicians and the last thing I want to do is have to read politicians finely worded measures. Then have to read the argument for and against it and not truly knowing the spin of each argument and the effect of the measure.

I did vote in the last election and the only reason I did was to vote for the stem cell research. I voted no for everything else.

Did you read my posts, I state many times that mandatory participation might not be the answer but I think it’s worth consideration and debate. You would be a fool if you didn’t want to improve (if that’s what it does to the process) you’re political model.

Why am I so interested?

Because I give a dam what happens around the world
Because I study international politics

 

[cubanb]

Did you read my posts, I state many times that mandatory participation might not be the answer but I think it’s worth consideration and debate. You would be a fool if you didn’t want to improve (if that’s what it does to the process) you’re political model.

I have read your posts and was replying more in general to the argument for mandatory participation.

I just don't see how this would improve our model. It's already hard enough to get people to care when it is voluntary, Americans would be pissed to have any such mandatory participation

 

[Zaptruder]

I have read your posts and was replying more in general to the argument for mandatory participation.

I just don't see how this would improve our model. It's already hard enough to get people to care when it is voluntary, Americans would be pissed to have any such mandatory participation

The difficulty would be in crossing over...

but I think without a doubt, once americans become used to the idea of mandatory turn up, then it would be better for the overall political process.

Nullifies the population and group biases of turn out, making sure that the democratic process is something everyone has a say in, rather than the real effect of something that certain groups has more say over due to the effects of participation.

Also, with it been mandatory, it would likely encourage a greater political consideration from all people.

It would reduce the effects of apathy, just simply by forcing people to go.

But right now, people seem so worried about their own immediate personal freedoms... that they can't seem to see past it, to how life changing for the nation the choice of government is.

 

[fart]

voting reform is something no one really wants to touch. a major change in voter demographics would outmode BOTH parties at this point. neither party wants that.

 

[Phoenix]

The difficulty would be in crossing over...

but I think without a doubt, once americans become used to the idea of mandatory turn up, then it would be better for the overall political process.

Explain what concrete effects would come from it and why they would result. You want to embark on a mult-billion dollar experiment, lets start coming up with tangible results. You going to arrest the people who don't go? Fine them? Shoot them? If its mandatory, what's your penalty? How much money are you willing to put up with from the damn near daily challenges this would get in the courts?

Nullifies the population and group biases of turn out, making sure that the democratic process is something everyone has a say in, rather than the real effect of something that certain groups has more say over due to the effects of participation.

Everyone already has a say in it. If you think that by forcing people to participate you're going to get a voter diversification change you're fooling yourself.

Also, with it been mandatory, it would likely encourage a greater political consideration from all people.

Explain how you arrive at this premise because I have yet to see anyone come up with a compelling reason on how this would change the minds of the people.

It would reduce the effects of apathy, just simply by forcing people to go.

But right now, people seem so worried about their own immediate personal freedoms... that they can't seem to see past it, to how life changing for the nation the choice of government is.

What you can't seem to get past is that choice is choice. Forcing people to make a choice only guarantees that they will choose 'something', but nothing in particular. When you don't know the answer on a test what do you do - you pick something that looks right and more often than not you get it wrong. You'd be better off having a lotto machine vote for them for goodness sakes!

 

[slayn]

if forced to vote, I would not put any thought into voting at all. Depending on the system (seeing as I've never voted and all I've ever seen is the absentee balot thats a punch card like thingy) I would poke holes in my best possible attempt to create a picture of a hand flicking off whoever looks at it.

 

[ChrisReid]

You can pretty much take the day off, say that you were at the polls all day and no one can tell you anything. No employer can make it impossible or even uncomfortable for their employees to vote. That is a high crime with both civil and criminal penalties.

I've never heard of this. You'd get laughed out of the room if you tried to pull that at my work.