Mandatory Voting:

Neewbie_noob

Looking at the appallingly low turnout at the Children Referendum on Saturday, even though it was on a weekend, mandatory voting got me thinking. They even have this in Australian if I'm not mistaken.

Countries in red have mandatory voting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Compulsory_voting.svg

My grandmother (RIP) always said that women fought long and hard enough to get suffrage and the youth of today just throw it away. On the flip side of the coin, generally speaking, people who lack interest or are indifferent to politics are usually very politically ignorant and I personally wouldn't like the likes of them having a say. So I am actually against mandatory voting. It's just a discussion I was having with someone.

Discuss

Xavi6

Neewbie_noob wrote: »

They even have this in Australian if I'm not mistaken.

Only if you're registered, not everyone is

Skid

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

If TDs are allowed to abstain from votes, ordinary citizens should have the same entitlement.

RobbieTheRobber

Free Sean Quinn!

http://www.anglocelt.ie/news/breakingnews/articles/2012/11/12/4013225-cavanmonaghan-says-yes-in-referendumbr/

Sinfonia

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

No.
The entitlement to a vote should include the freedom to waive it.

Adyx

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

Whatever about referendums, if mandatory voting ever came in for elections I will go out of my way to spoil my vote every time.

RobbieTheRobber

Adyx wrote: »

Whatever about referendums, if mandatory voting ever came in for elections I will go out of my way to spoil my vote every time.

When you say "out of your way", do you mean "go to your polling station"?

Seems a lot less aggressive when you say it like " if mandatory voting ever came in for elections I will go to my polling station to spoil my vote"!

bbam

No

Skid wrote: »

If TDs are allowed to abstain from votes, ordinary citizens should have the same entitlement.

It shouldn't be allowed either though. They're paid to go there and make decisions, not sit on their hands as they most likely have a vested interest or friendship with someone who would loose out.

Voting should be mandatory, if you miss three votes then you loose the right to vote as you dont deserve it.

LeinsterDub

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

Adyx wrote: »

Whatever about referendums, if mandatory voting ever came in for elections I will go out of my way to spoil my vote every time.

Well at least you would have engaged with the process .

P.S the op has set up the poll in such a way you can spoil your vote and vote for all 3 options . A nice touch really.

Where To

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

Mandatory aptitude test before being allowed to vote is a much better idea.

jester77

I'd be for enforcing some sort of a test to see if the person understands what they are voting for before making voting mandatory.

RobbieTheRobber

bbam wrote: »

It shouldn't be allowed either though. They're paid to go there and make decisions, not sit on their hands as they most likely have a vested interest or friendship with someone who would loose out.

Voting should be mandatory, if you miss three votes then you loose the right to vote as you dont deserve it.

:eek:

This sounds like a loophole a clever government could use to eliminate the need for an electorate.

pippip

I agree if registered. I think some other countries have it where if you miss your vote you cannot vote in the next one.

But not until they make it more accessible for people to vote when away from home , different counties or online or post.

Death and Taxes

Why does the poll not have an abstain choice?:D

Frank Black

Anyone I know who doesn't vote, doesn't have a clue about this issues involved at any election or referendum - it's a blessing that they don't bother.

mickoneill30

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

I dunno. I was listening on the radio this morning. Because so few turned out and because of whatever percentage the Yes vote won by the No campaigners were saying only 19% of people that could vote, voted Yes. So that means the majority 81% said No. That was their logic.

If that kind of stupid argument ever gains traction I think we should have mandatory voting. Maybe with an extra option saying I turned up but I want my vote spoiled or I don't have a clue, or I'm not bothered etc. etc.

As it is, I'm happy with the majority of people who bothered to vote get what they voted for. If most people couldn't be bothered going down to their polling stations to put a tick in the box then they shouldn't complain if the vote goes against them. I know some people were away or couldn't vote for a legitimate reason but I don't think the low turn out was because everybody was away from their constituencies on Saturday.

keith16

I think it's a bad idea. But, like all arguments, there is probably a middle ground to be reached. IF the government wanted to increase turnout, they could make it a public holiday, say on a Friday, but you could only avail of this time off IF you voted.

There are probably drawbacks to the above too, it's a bit "nanny state" and I can't see employers being too happy about it either.

In any case, the government will probably use this referendum as a poster boy for their "no elections / voting on a Saturday".

RobbieTheRobber

pippip wrote: »

I agree if registered. I think some other countries have it where if you miss your vote you cannot vote in the next one.

But not until they make it more accessible for people to vote when away from home , different counties or online or post.

Depends what you mean by away from home i guess, if you mean away for a week on holiday. Perhaps some type of early voting.

If you mean so people who have lived in dublin for the past number of years can travel home to ballygobackwards to cast a vote then no I dont agree!

Rasheed

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

No point in people voting if they don't properly understand the implications of a what will be passed so I disagree with mandatory voting.

thebigbiffo

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

I've 2 kids so had a vested interest in this referendum. My wife decided she wanted to vote no, I abstained. the reason being I never got around to informing myself about it, so i didn't have an opinion or view (yeah yeah, I'm a bad person).

as a free citizen, that's my prerogative...why should I be forced to vote even though I feel I don't know enough? Let people more qualified than me vote!

RobbieTheRobber

Rasheed wrote: »

No point in people voting if they don't properly understand the implications of a what will be passed so I disagree with mandatory voting.

Would you say the majority of people who voted have a good enough understanding of consitutional law to know what effect the changes can and will have?

mickoneill30

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

thebigbiffo wrote: »

Let people more qualified than me vote!

That's fine if only people more qualified than you are voting

Ghandee

19% of our voting population changed the constitution.

Skid

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

Neewbie_noob wrote: »

My grandmother (RIP) always said that women fought long and hard enough to get suffrage and the youth of today just throw it away.

http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?CountryCode=IE

1948 Election turnout 74.25%
2011 Election turnout 70.05%

Not much of a difference, it is wrong to blame 'the youth of today' - what were the youth of 1948 doing?

The problem with Referendums is that the Courts can interpret them in a completely different way to what people thought they were voting on (like the Abortion Referendum in the early 80s) Many people remember this, and that's why they choose not to vote when they are undecided.

pippip

They should put a pop quiz on the poling card and if you answer the questions right then your vote is counted.

mickoneill30

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

Ghandee wrote: »

19% of our voting population changed the constitution.

Yeah but 100% of our voting population had the chance to change the constitution.

Ghandee

mickoneill30 wrote: »

Yeah but 100% of our voting population had the chance to change the constitution.

I agree, don't get me wrong.

I just think its crazy!

Esoteric_

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

Why should we be forced to vote if we don't want to? I have voted every single time a vote has come up since I turned 18, and I read up on what I was voting for/against, too, but why should we vote if we don't want to? My sister chooses not to vote, which is her prerogative.

Women fought for our RIGHT to vote, not for us to be FORCED to vote. Isn't forcing people to vote pretty much the same as not allowing people to vote?

Adyx

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

When you say "out of your way", do you mean "go to your polling station"?

Seems a lot less aggressive when you say it like " if mandatory voting ever came in for elections I will go to my polling station to spoil my vote"!

Well I didn't mean it in an aggressive way. What would be the point when only the person counting the votes would see it. But yes considering i'm not even registered, going to the polling station would be out of my way. :P

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Well at least you would have engaged with the process .

P.S the op has set up the poll in such a way you can spoil your vote and vote for all 3 options . A nice touch really.

The only process I'd have engaged in would be the wasting of my time and that of the counters.

Rubber_Soul

Atari One-Party Dictatorship

No. I'd rather any Constitutional changes to be made by an electorate that educated themselves to what the changes actually mean. If you force people to vote then all you will end up with is an uneducated electorate voting for no other reason than they have to.

Zomg Okay

No

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

:eek:

This sounds like a loophole a clever government could use to eliminate the need for an electorate.

No worries, then.