Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Is it even feasible?
Not just for the Presidency, but all pertinent elections applicable to the State, county, city etc. in which a person lives.

So, should it, and is it feasible?

No.

Nope, if a person does not want to vote and is forced into it..they aren't really going to think about who they are voting for..they are probably just going to pick at random.

Originally posted by riv6672
Is it even feasible?
Not just for the Presidency, but all pertinent elections applicable to the State, county, city etc. in which a person lives.

So, should it, and is it feasible?



No. It's a very bad idea because people who vote without being forced to have done their research on the candidates and will make an intelligent vote based on who they think best serves their interests and/or has the same or similar stances on key issues. If everybody is forced to vote then those who know nothing about the candidates will just make a random choice for who to vote for. It'd do much more harm than good, imo.

Originally posted by riv6672
Is it even feasible?
Not just for the Presidency, but all pertinent elections applicable to the State, county, city etc. in which a person lives.

So, should it, and is it feasible?
It is feasible. Plenty of countries do it. Brazil is probably the biggest example. If a disorganized country like Brazil can manage it, we definitely could.

I don't think it should be mandatory, but I do think there should be extra incentive for casting a ballot. Not sure how to provide that though.

Originally posted by Star428
No. It's a very bad idea because people who vote without being forced to have done their research on the candidates and will make an intelligent vote based on who they think best serves their interests and/or has the same or similar stances on key issues. If everybody is forced to vote then those who know nothing about the candidates will just make a random choice for who to vote for. It'd do much more harm than good, imo.
Not necessarily. Plenty of people vote based on party loyalty or "gut feeling" rather than any serious "research."

This is a bad idea, now you have no choice, you only have 2, Not before long, we will only have 1.

Isn't Australia do this? Or have a fine system set up if you don't vote?

Maybe we could set up a system like in Starship Troopers. Citizens and Civilians.
1 set having more rights then the others due to PARTICIPATION!

aka. the pot heads get SCREWED!

The system in Starship Troopers was that you could only vote if you served in the military or in equivalent civil service, not that people who voted were given more privileges.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
This is a bad idea, now you have no choice, you only have 2, Not before long, we will only have 1.
I think it could work if participation were mandatory, but you still had the option of casting a blank ballot. That way at least everyone would be involved in some way with the process, but they wouldn't be forced to make a choice.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
The system in Starship Troopers was that you could only vote if you served in the military or in equivalent civil service, not that people who voted were given more privileges.

I think it could work if participation were mandatory, but you still had the option of casting a blank ballot. That way at least everyone would be involved in some way with the process, but they wouldn't be forced to make a choice.

That is actually a really good idea.

Right now, I need to start researching Belgian candidates. Voting is mandatory over there and I have absolutely no idea who's good or bad, only that the Flemish National Party are apparently racist assholes so I should avoid all of their candidates.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Right now, I need to start researching Belgian candidates. Voting is mandatory over there and I have absolutely no idea who's good or bad, only that the Flemish National Party are apparently racist assholes so I should avoid all of their candidates.

Don't say the world Belgian right now, I'm hungry.

On the real though, any voting reform in America should try to break the influence of money and shatter the two party stranglehold.

I kind of hope that the Republican and Democrat parties break up into extreme and moderate pieces. That way we'd have four parties plus the biggest current third parties (Green and Libertarian) might become serious contenders as they absorb former Democrats and Republicans.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Don't say the world Belgian right now, I'm hungry.
For beer, waffles, chocolate, stew, mussels, and fries?

All of the above.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
On the real though, any voting reform in America should try to break the influence of money and shatter the two party stranglehold.

I kind of hope that the Republican and Democrat parties break up into extreme and moderate pieces. That way we'd have four parties plus the biggest current third parties (Green and Libertarian) might become serious contenders as they absorb former Democrats and Republicans.

Yea and its so obvious dems and republicans try and hold onto their power so bad, they don't want anymore competition. This two party system has got to go.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
All of the above.
Now I'm hungry too.

Thanks for the great responses, guys.
Like Omega Vision, i'm not sure what incentives could be provided, but, maybe non participation could be handled like the IRS handles non payment of taxes?
Have an sudit where you provide proof as to why you didnt vote (hospitalization, incarceration, some circumstance where application for an absentee ballot wasnt possible...), and if that proof wasnt adequate, you'd be fined, the amount varying on a case by case basis.
Not really an incentive, more of a stick than a carrot, actually...

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Now I'm hungry too.

I'm guessing we were doing the same thing last night

The problem with providing incentives is..well, some people will then just vote in order to get the incentive. That doesn't really help the country if this person doesn't really know the issues of who they are voting for and is just doing it to get some kind of reward.

the opportunity to vote and decide who governs your country should be incentive enough!

Originally posted by walshy
the opportunity to vote and decide who governs your country should be incentive enough!



True, but many people don't give a flying phuck who the President is.

The ones promised free everything are.

Originally posted by Surtur
The problem with providing incentives is..well, some people will then just vote in order to get the incentive. That doesn't really help the country if this person doesn't really know the issues of who they are voting for and is just doing it to get some kind of reward.
Good point.

Just spoke with someone who i guess is some sort of anarchist, doesnt think the government should MAKE people do anything.
I had to politely laugh at that.

I'm for it, largely on the grounds that it neatly eliminates voter suppression.

When we still have campaigns aimed at preventing people from voting, things set up so that some areas have to wait for hours to vote, etc., voter suppression is a real problem in the US.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
The ones promised free everything are.


Fun fact: No president promises that, and stuff like healthcare and such are actually much cheaper to do collectively than not.


Accusing democrats of 'promising free everything' is just sour grapes- what works, works, and sometimes their way is simply more efficient for everyone.


Heck, if they weren't capable of carrying through with their promises, it'd be a very short sighted strategy. The reason many are afraid is because they know those promises can be carried out successfully, they're just ideologically opposed to that result.


Also note how the Republican's strategy often revolves around... offering tax-breaks to those who can already easily afford all their taxes. So they're not really ones to talk about offering stuff for votes ^^

Nice.
I'm not overly political, so insights like yours are very interesting to me.

^^^

I remember enjoying a movie he made with Billy Blanks called Back in Action. Also just found out he voiced Bolphinga in the animated Green Lantern movie in 2011.