Compulsory Voting

Star

Gold Member
Apr 5, 2009
2,532
614
190
.
In this years mid-term election, a pathetic 36.6 percent voted.
In Australia about 92% of eligible voters voted in their last election.
Do you think it's time to start talking about compulsory voting?


The Economist explains
Where is it compulsory to vote?
Sep 19th 2013

<snip>

...in some countries skipping the polling booth can land you in trouble. In Australia non-voters can expect a letter from the electoral commission demanding an explanation for their absenteeism. If they don’t have a good excuse they are fined A$20 ($19). If they fail to pay they can end up in court, where the fine is upped to A$170, plus court fees. Refuse to cough up and they face jail. A survey by Britain’s electoral commission in 2006 categorised three other countries as having “very strict” compulsory-voting regimes. In Brazil and Peru, non-voters are banned from carrying out various administrative transactions (Brazilians cannot apply for passports or sit professional exams, in theory at least), as well as facing small fines. In Singapore, non-voters have their names removed from the electoral roll—which many of them are presumably not too worried by. A host of other countries have varyingly strict rules on voting, along with some curious get-outs. Illiterate people are excused in Brazil and Ecuador; soldiers are excluded in Brazil, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala and Lebanon. The elderly are off the hook in several countries. And in Bolivia, where voting is notionally compulsory, married people are enfranchised from the age of 18, whereas singletons must wait until they are 21.

Proponents of mandatory voting argue that democracy is too important to be optional. Others say that compulsory self-determination is something of a contradiction in terms.

<snip>
.
 
The Crony-Socialism there is just like the Crony-Capitalism here. Both Governments controlled by large Corporations.
 
No thanks. Who other than Democrats wants to welcome legions of ignorant, uniformed voters to the polls? I certainly don't want to be obligated to their ignorant desires or choices. Why should the vote of a maroon cancel out my informed vote?
 
The better option would be to have most Americans not vote. Clueless fucking irrational children.

You got your wish, didn't you, the clueless irrational children stayed home this election and the rational people loaded up with clues went to the polls.
 
The better option would be to have most Americans not vote. Clueless fucking irrational children.

You got your wish, didn't you, the clueless irrational children stayed home this election and the rational people loaded up with clues went to the polls.
How I wish that were true, but Americans don't vote for who should be in office, they vote for who runs, the first mistake. Believing they can actually do something is the second mistake.
 
The better option would be to have most Americans not vote. Clueless fucking irrational children.

You got your wish, didn't you, the clueless irrational children stayed home this election and the rational people loaded up with clues went to the polls.
How I wish that were true, but Americans don't vote for who should be in office, they vote for who runs, the first mistake. Believing they can actually do something is the second mistake.
Well, Governor Palin should be in the White House but she's never run. That's who you meant, right? What are we supposed to do with a comment like yours? How do we get people who should be in office into office if they don't run?
 
The better option would be to have most Americans not vote. Clueless fucking irrational children.

You got your wish, didn't you, the clueless irrational children stayed home this election and the rational people loaded up with clues went to the polls.
How I wish that were true, but Americans don't vote for who should be in office, they vote for who runs, the first mistake. Believing they can actually do something is the second mistake.
Well, Governor Palin should be in the White House but she's never run. That's who you meant, right? What are we supposed to do with a comment like yours? How do we get people who should be in office into office if they don't run?
Easy, rational people appoint them. Letting the pitchforks vote is idiotic, they have fields to plow.
 
The better option would be to have most Americans not vote. Clueless fucking irrational children.

You got your wish, didn't you, the clueless irrational children stayed home this election and the rational people loaded up with clues went to the polls.
How I wish that were true, but Americans don't vote for who should be in office, they vote for who runs, the first mistake. Believing they can actually do something is the second mistake.
Well, Governor Palin should be in the White House but she's never run. That's who you meant, right? What are we supposed to do with a comment like yours? How do we get people who should be in office into office if they don't run?
Easy, rational people appoint them. Letting the pitchforks vote is idiotic, they have fields to plow.

Let's see if you can spot the problem here. Every liberal on this board believes that they're rational. Are you getting a vibe yet?
 
The better option would be to have most Americans not vote. Clueless fucking irrational children.

You got your wish, didn't you, the clueless irrational children stayed home this election and the rational people loaded up with clues went to the polls.
How I wish that were true, but Americans don't vote for who should be in office, they vote for who runs, the first mistake. Believing they can actually do something is the second mistake.
Well, Governor Palin should be in the White House but she's never run. That's who you meant, right? What are we supposed to do with a comment like yours? How do we get people who should be in office into office if they don't run?
Easy, rational people appoint them. Letting the pitchforks vote is idiotic, they have fields to plow.

Let's see if you can spot the problem here. Every liberal on this board believes that they're rational. Are you getting a vibe yet?
Rational liberals founded this nation. We're still around, we're just 230 years smarter. If you'd use your head instead of your emotions you'd understand that.
 
You got your wish, didn't you, the clueless irrational children stayed home this election and the rational people loaded up with clues went to the polls.
How I wish that were true, but Americans don't vote for who should be in office, they vote for who runs, the first mistake. Believing they can actually do something is the second mistake.
Well, Governor Palin should be in the White House but she's never run. That's who you meant, right? What are we supposed to do with a comment like yours? How do we get people who should be in office into office if they don't run?
Easy, rational people appoint them. Letting the pitchforks vote is idiotic, they have fields to plow.

Let's see if you can spot the problem here. Every liberal on this board believes that they're rational. Are you getting a vibe yet?
Rational liberals founded this nation. We're still around, we're just 230 years smarter. If you'd use your head instead of your emotions you'd understand that.
A liberal instructing a conservative to think instead of feel. What, are we in Bizarro Universe all of a sudden? Hey, what's Reverse Spock doing here?

Spock_%28mirror%29.jpg
 
How I wish that were true, but Americans don't vote for who should be in office, they vote for who runs, the first mistake. Believing they can actually do something is the second mistake.
Well, Governor Palin should be in the White House but she's never run. That's who you meant, right? What are we supposed to do with a comment like yours? How do we get people who should be in office into office if they don't run?
Easy, rational people appoint them. Letting the pitchforks vote is idiotic, they have fields to plow.

Let's see if you can spot the problem here. Every liberal on this board believes that they're rational. Are you getting a vibe yet?
Rational liberals founded this nation. We're still around, we're just 230 years smarter. If you'd use your head instead of your emotions you'd understand that.
A liberal instructing a conservative to think instead of feel. What, are we in Bizarro Universe all of a sudden? Hey, there's reverse over there.

Spock_%28mirror%29.jpg
Most "conservatives" aren't rational, which is what makes them conservative. Here they are Reactionaries, which makes them even less rational, meaning they are not just children but stupid ones at that.
 
No thanks. Who other than Democrats wants to welcome legions of ignorant, uniformed voters to the polls? I certainly don't want to be obligated to their ignorant desires or choices. Why should the vote of a maroon cancel out my informed vote?


Obviously you don't believe in the American Constitution. You may want to consider moving to a country that does not adhere to a strong democratic tradition.

Corruption/criminal activity exists in every walk of life, but----- but "Places with mandatory voting also have less wealth inequality, lower levels of political corruption and higher levels of satisfaction with the way democracy is working than voluntary systems."

Why do you hate Americans?
.
 
.
In this years mid-term election, a pathetic 36.6 percent voted.
In Australia about 92% of eligible voters voted in their last election.
Do you think it's time to start talking about compulsory voting?


The Economist explains
Where is it compulsory to vote?
Sep 19th 2013

<snip>

...in some countries skipping the polling booth can land you in trouble. In Australia non-voters can expect a letter from the electoral commission demanding an explanation for their absenteeism. If they don’t have a good excuse they are fined A$20 ($19). If they fail to pay they can end up in court, where the fine is upped to A$170, plus court fees. Refuse to cough up and they face jail. A survey by Britain’s electoral commission in 2006 categorised three other countries as having “very strict” compulsory-voting regimes. In Brazil and Peru, non-voters are banned from carrying out various administrative transactions (Brazilians cannot apply for passports or sit professional exams, in theory at least), as well as facing small fines. In Singapore, non-voters have their names removed from the electoral roll—which many of them are presumably not too worried by. A host of other countries have varyingly strict rules on voting, along with some curious get-outs. Illiterate people are excused in Brazil and Ecuador; soldiers are excluded in Brazil, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala and Lebanon. The elderly are off the hook in several countries. And in Bolivia, where voting is notionally compulsory, married people are enfranchised from the age of 18, whereas singletons must wait until they are 21.

Proponents of mandatory voting argue that democracy is too important to be optional. Others say that compulsory self-determination is something of a contradiction in terms.

<snip>
.
Not until we have a literacy test.
 
How I wish that were true, but Americans don't vote for who should be in office, they vote for who runs, the first mistake. Believing they can actually do something is the second mistake.
Well, Governor Palin should be in the White House but she's never run. That's who you meant, right? What are we supposed to do with a comment like yours? How do we get people who should be in office into office if they don't run?
Easy, rational people appoint them. Letting the pitchforks vote is idiotic, they have fields to plow.

Let's see if you can spot the problem here. Every liberal on this board believes that they're rational. Are you getting a vibe yet?
Rational liberals founded this nation. We're still around, we're just 230 years smarter. If you'd use your head instead of your emotions you'd understand that.
A liberal instructing a conservative to think instead of feel. What, are we in Bizarro Universe all of a sudden? Hey, what's Reverse Spock doing here?

Spock_%28mirror%29.jpg
Reverse Spock=Saul Alinsky
 

Forum List

Back
Top