no, because so many people don't have a clue about the parties and what they stand for. it's bad enough that folk like that do vote now without introducing more people who don't know and don't care, who could end up voting in parties like UKIP or BNP as a protest vote
in addition to that, there are many people who don't like any of the current parties so don't want to support them
a spoiler vote is just a waste of time, so it's better avoiding all the situations above by letting people have a democratic right not to vote, and not force them to do things they don't want to do and don't know about which can only lead to problems
it's just a stupid idea that's not been thought out properly
The same types of people vote every time, so the same sort of MP's get elected.
If everyone voted, it would give a better chance to other parties to get in.
why would forcing people to vote produce any different result? Are you saying all those who don't vote would vote for a different party?
Polling with a 1000 people, give a 3% margin of error. You could say 10000 people is more than enough to get a clear vote done. The rest can watch TV and be happy not caring if Nick Clegg is in Bed with Ed Miliband or not.
no, because so many people don't have a clue about the parties and what they stand for. it's bad enough that folk like that do vote now without introducing more people who don't know and don't care, who could end up voting in parties like UKIP or BNP as a protest vote
in addition to that, there are many people who don't like any of the current parties so don't want to support them
a spoiler vote is just a waste of time, so it's better avoiding all the situations above by letting people have a democratic right not to vote, and not force them to do things they don't want to do and don't know about which can only lead to problems
it's just a stupid idea that's not been thought out properly
The BNP will soon cease to exist.
UKIP is not anything to do with them, and is in third place nationally.
why would forcing people to vote produce any different result? Are you saying all those who don't vote would vote for a different party?
Polling with a 1000 people, give a 3% margin of error. You could say 10000 people is more than enough to get a clear vote done. The rest can watch TV and be happy not caring if Nick Clegg is in Bed with Ed Miliband or not.
You would certainly get something different if you only allowed 1 random person to vote from each constituency. Wouldn't that solve both your problem and mine?
You would certainly get something different if you only allowed 1 random person to vote from each constituency. Wouldn't that solve both your problem and mine?
Australia has it one day, but on the weekend IIRC. They have compulsory voting with a fairly low tax ($25?) for not doing so
That not strictly correct
You have to turn up to a polling station and get a ballot paper
You have to put the ballot paper in the voting box
But you don't have to write anything on to it.
So you can cover the voting paper with obscenities if you want to, or just leave it blank.
These are counted as spoiled ballot papers.
allow 1 random person to vote for each constituency. Wouldn't that give you more chance a different party would get in?
That way only 1 person is forced to vote, giving the rest of us time to watch emmerdale in peace without politicians knocking at our door disturbing us.
allow 1 random person to vote for each constituency. Wouldn't that give you more chance a different party would get in?
That way only 1 person is forced to vote, giving the rest of us time to watch emmerdale in peace without politicians knocking at our door disturbing us.
Yes, but then how could anyone elected claim to have the backing of the people. (And they do this occasionally).
Isn't forcing people to do things they don't wish to do wrong? Sounds like coercion just to say "Everyone voted, so it must be good".
Wouldn't it be better to actually have a voting system that makes people want to vote? rather than threaten them with Torture or Jail?
But you could say that about anything, you could say we force people to dress, we force people to get a passport if they want to leave the UK, we force people to obey laws.
They would be fined if they did not vote, no torture of jail.
What voting system would make people want to vote?
They went to war to vote? or went to war because people in power made them?
The expression you're looking for is "cannon fodder" because that's what it was, with most of the medals for those who remained in the bunker shouting, "Charge".
But you could say that about anything, you could say we force people to dress, we force people to get a passport if they want to leave the UK, we force people to obey laws.
They would be fined if they did not vote, no torture of jail.
What voting system would make people want to vote?
I'm not forced to dress. I'm sat here now in my y-fronts.
What if I can't pay the fine?
Perhaps one that allows you to vote for a party you believe in? Rather than against one you don't. The current system is broken, no one wants to vote, no one cares and everyone knows nothing really changes. Blue/Red it's all the same.
I'm not forced to dress. I'm sat here now in my y-fronts.
What if I can't pay the fine?
Perhaps one that allows you to vote for a party you believe in? Rather than against one you don't. The current system is broken, no one wants to vote, no one cares and everyone knows nothing really changes. Blue/Red it's all the same.
You can vote for whoever you want, Liberals used to be in power long ago, then the mood changed to Labour, it will change again.
But you can't walk down the street in y fronts for long can you?
People in this country would prefer Russia's system, I swear it.
Comments
in addition to that, there are many people who don't like any of the current parties so don't want to support them
a spoiler vote is just a waste of time, so it's better avoiding all the situations above by letting people have a democratic right not to vote, and not force them to do things they don't want to do and don't know about which can only lead to problems
it's just a stupid idea that's not been thought out properly
why would forcing people to vote produce any different result? Are you saying all those who don't vote would vote for a different party?
Polling with a 1000 people, give a 3% margin of error. You could say 10000 people is more than enough to get a clear vote done. The rest can watch TV and be happy not caring if Nick Clegg is in Bed with Ed Miliband or not.
Yes. 100%
Fine or prison for non-compliance
The BNP will soon cease to exist.
UKIP is not anything to do with them, and is in third place nationally.
I am saying they might.
You would certainly get something different if you only allowed 1 random person to vote from each constituency. Wouldn't that solve both your problem and mine?
I don't get the point of that statement.
That not strictly correct
You have to turn up to a polling station and get a ballot paper
You have to put the ballot paper in the voting box
But you don't have to write anything on to it.
So you can cover the voting paper with obscenities if you want to, or just leave it blank.
These are counted as spoiled ballot papers.
allow 1 random person to vote for each constituency. Wouldn't that give you more chance a different party would get in?
That way only 1 person is forced to vote, giving the rest of us time to watch emmerdale in peace without politicians knocking at our door disturbing us.
Yes, but then how could anyone elected claim to have the backing of the people. (And they do this occasionally).
How would 33% of the population voting Labour mean they have the backing of the people. You need to change the voting system for that.
No, because if each person has been given the chance to vote, what ever the outcome they can say the people have chosen it.
Whereas if everyone had to vote, the people really will have chosen it.
Isn't forcing people to do things they don't wish to do wrong? Sounds like coercion just to say "Everyone voted, so it must be good".
Wouldn't it be better to actually have a voting system that makes people want to vote? rather than threaten them with Torture or Jail?
But you could say that about anything, you could say we force people to dress, we force people to get a passport if they want to leave the UK, we force people to obey laws.
They would be fined if they did not vote, no torture of jail.
What voting system would make people want to vote?
The expression you're looking for is "cannon fodder" because that's what it was, with most of the medals for those who remained in the bunker shouting, "Charge".
I'm not forced to dress. I'm sat here now in my y-fronts.
What if I can't pay the fine?
Perhaps one that allows you to vote for a party you believe in? Rather than against one you don't. The current system is broken, no one wants to vote, no one cares and everyone knows nothing really changes. Blue/Red it's all the same.
You can vote for whoever you want, Liberals used to be in power long ago, then the mood changed to Labour, it will change again.
But you can't walk down the street in y fronts for long can you?
People in this country would prefer Russia's system, I swear it.
When starting a thread there are 3 boxes at the bottom of the page and one of them has a tick box for starting a poll.
Use sparingly!
i.e:
Something is good, and/or important = so force people to do it!
It has to be said it's quite a New Labour approach.
When it comes to these things the "how" of it is as important as the final result.
Not only is it wrong it masks the problem, which eventually bursts through anyway in interesting UKIPPY ways. As we are currently seeing.
What law would this be then?
Racial/Religious hatred.