The Political Discussion Thread

[Gatefan1976]

Does the UK not have "compulsory voting"?

[Ukko]

Nope.

[Gatefan1976]

Nope.

Hmm, I wonder why we do then??

[DigiFluid]

Dunno. We don't have mandatory voting either.

[Ukko]

Hmm, I wonder why we do then??

No idea.
I dont think its right anyway. No one has the right to force me to vote for anyone i dont want to. And i dont like any of them. I'll vote when i find someone worth voting for, and wont waste a vote on some random independent or no chancer party for the sake of turnout numbers or "protest".
If they want a higher turn out, then they have find a way to restore peoples faith in the system, in parliament and so on.

[lordofseas]

No idea.
I dont think its right anyway. No one has the right to force me to vote for anyone i dont want to. And i dont like any of them. I'll vote when i find someone worth voting for, and wont waste a vote on some random independent or no chancer party for the sake of turnout numbers or "protest".
If they want a higher turn out, then they have find a way to restore peoples faith in the system, in parliament and so on.

I would not be against compulsory voting as long as there was a "none of the above" option on the ballot, and people could be waived from paying a fine if a satisfactory reason is given.

[fumblesmcstupid]

I live in Oregon and our democrat primary is coming up. I got out my ballot and I voted for Obama. That is the only friggin name I knew. Half the nominee's for my county on my ballot was "no candidate filed" or one person I never heard of. I just felt like what's the point.

[Gatefan1976]

No idea.
I dont think its right anyway. No one has the right to force me to vote for anyone i dont want to. And i dont like any of them. I'll vote when i find someone worth voting for, and wont waste a vote on some random independent or no chancer party for the sake of turnout numbers or "protest".

I assume you guys in the UK are like us however, you don't *really* vote for anyone, but parties instead?
"throwing the vote" is, I believe, fairly common out here because of mandatory voting, but at least no one can say they did not know or were not given the chance to "have thier say".

If they want a higher turn out, then they have find a way to restore peoples faith in the system, in parliament and so on.

Fair call.

[Ukko]

I would not be against compulsory voting as long as there was a "none of the above" option on the ballot, and people could be waived from paying a fine if a satisfactory reason is given.

None of the above is just a waste though. If you're gonna vote for no one, there is no point in voting really. The government dont get to increase turn out by forcing people to vote, or tick the "no one" box, by threatening fines and such. I think its crap (i had a stronger word).
If they want a bigger turn out, then they need to put the work in, they need to earn it.

[Ukko]

I assume you guys in the UK are like us however, you don't *really* vote for anyone, but parties instead?
"throwing the vote" is, I believe, fairly common out here because of mandatory voting, but at least no one can say they did not know or were not given the chance to "have thier say".

Fair call.

We vote or parties, like Labour, Conservatives, Greens. The parties, i believe, are the ones who elect their leaders.

[lordofseas]

I live in Oregon and our democrat primary is coming up. I got out my ballot and I voted for Obama. That is the only friggin name I knew. Half the nominee's for my county on my ballot was "no candidate filed" or one person I never heard of. I just felt like what's the point.

Obama is better than Mittens.

None of the above is just a waste though. If you're gonna vote for no one, there is no point in voting really. The government dont get increase turn out by forcing people to vote, or tick the "no one" box, by threatening fines and such. I think its crap (i had a stronger word).
If they want a bigger turn out, then they need to put the work in, they need to earn it.

Oh, it's definitely a wasted vote. I'm just saying that if a person is forced to vote, they should be allowed to conscientiously object to all the candidates if they so please. It can also be used as a form of protest against the election.

[lordofseas]

We vote or parties, like Labour, Conservatives, Greens. The parties, i believe, are the ones who elect their leaders.

Well, technically, there are people on the ballot. It's not like Israel, where they actually vote for the party Kadima or Meretz, and the party has a list of members that will enter the Knesset according to percentage. You vote for people using First Past the Post. I would say that people vote for the person representing the Conservatives or Greens, not because they know the person's individual platform particularly well, but because they know the party platform.

[DigiFluid]

I assume you guys in the UK are like us however, you don't *really* vote for anyone, but parties instead?

I think legacy Britain parliaments all generally function the same. Vote for your local MP, whoever's party has the most MP seats at the end of the election controls the federal government. At least, that's how it works in Canada.

"throwing the vote" is, I believe, fairly common out here because of mandatory voting, but at least no one can say they did not know or were not given the chance to "have thier say".

Not a compelling reason to force voting...

[lordofseas]

I think legacy Britain parliaments all generally function the same. Vote for your local MP, whoever's party has the most MP seats at the end of the election controls the federal government. At least, that's how it works in Canada.

Not a compelling reason to force voting...

Australia has an elected upper house. :/ Heck, members of the House of Lords are elected, in a roundabout sort of way.

[Ukko]

Obama is better than Mittens.



Oh, it's definitely a wasted vote. I'm just saying that if a person is forced to vote, they should be allowed to conscientiously object to all the candidates if they so please. It can also be used as a form of protest against the election.

[ ] Labour.
[ ] Conservative.
[ ] Lib Dems.
[ ] Greens.
[ ] Force me to vote again, and i'll vote for the nut cases.
[ ] Kaboom.

Well, technically, there are people on the ballot. It's not like Israel, where they actually vote for the party Kadima or Meretz, and the party has a list of members that will enter the Knesset according to percentage. You vote for people using First Past the Post. I would say that people vote for the person representing the Conservatives or Greens, not because they know the person's individual platform particularly well, but because they know the party platform.

We do elect local representatives. But in the big elections, we vote for the party, well, i think we're supposed too, but its all about the leader. This is all confusing and boring. I want to return to the days of absolute monarchy. At least then you knew who to blame when things went tits up. Plus, i like the queen.