Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think that voting in elections should be obligatory?

29 replies

SixImpossible · 27/05/2014 18:22

I admit that I am politically naive and may be missing something obvious, but is there any good reason why taking an active role in selecting the governance and representation of ourcountry should not be obligatory?

People always complain about every government - supposedly selected by the citizens. But only about 1/3 of citizens actually bother to cast a vote, and the winning party generally get 1/3 or less of the votes cast, which means we end up governed by a party selected by as little as 1/9 of the citizens. No wonder so many feel hard-done-by and complain!

So why is voting not part of the legally obligatory requirement of being a citizen?

OP posts:
Caitlin17 · 28/05/2014 01:17

The "none of the above" option is achieved by either writing that on the ballot paper or not putting a cross against any candidates.

I did that once when local elections coincided with Scottish Parliament elections. I voted in the local elections but did not vote for any of Holyrood candidates. I've only done it once.

shockinglybadteacher · 28/05/2014 01:24

It's pointless (spoiling paper) because no account is taken of why you spoiled it. A "none of the above" is the same as someone who's drawn a cross halfway between two parties' boxes is the same as someone who has covered it with glitter and drawn a detailed picture of a woman making love to a snake. They are all just spoiled papers and candidates get roughly a second to decide whether the paper's spoilt before it disappears.

Perhaps would be a good thing if there was a mechanism to decide why the paper was spoilt, sort of a "protest/no protest" thing. But is a picture of a woman making love to a snake automatically a protest, and if so, what does it signify? Even if you knew that loads of people were angry, or were None of the Above voters, you still wouldn't know why or what to do about it.

FamiliesShareGerms · 28/05/2014 06:48

But a majority vote for. "None of the above" would require the ballot to be re run, in theory prompting candidates to up their game. Of course on its own it's a pretty crude message, but currently everyone who doesn't bother to vote is in effect saying "None of the above" but in a way that can be ignored rather than in a way that would have a real and practical impact.

Lanabelle · 29/05/2014 01:35

What if you don't like any of them though?? You would have to turn up and vote no f*ing muppet please? If we were voting for politicians to be flogged in public I might vote for who I wanted on that but no thanks to another useless deaf wanker apparently representing the county thanks. I don't want a part of it.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page