PDA

View Full Version : Obama: Maybe it's time for mandatory voting



Hans
03-20-2015, 07:15 PM
At least 26 countries have compulsory voting, according to the Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. Failure to vote is punishable by a fine in countries such as Australia and Belgium; if you fail to pay your fine in Belgium, you could go to prison.

Aside from campaign finance issues, the United States also grapples with one of the lowest voter turnout rates among developed countries.

Less than 37% of eligible voters actually voted in the 2014 midterm elections, according to The Pew Charitable Trusts. That means about 144 million Americans -- more than the population of Russia -- skipped out.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/19/politics/obama-mandatory-voting/index.html

I don't think that is a bad idea.

Barry Morris
03-20-2015, 08:58 PM
In the land of the free, they will retain the right not to care.

Official Cat of Soonet
03-20-2015, 09:04 PM
In the land of the free, they will retain the right not to care.

I'd have to look it up but I am pretty sure The US had a higher percentage vote in the presidential election than we did for Prime Minister.

Barry Morris
03-20-2015, 09:07 PM
I'd have to look it up but I am pretty sure The US had a higher percentage vote in the presidential election than we did for Prime Minister.

We didn't have a vote for Prime Minister. Apples and oranges.

Official Cat of Soonet
03-20-2015, 09:11 PM
They don't have a vote for a president so I guess we can't talk about voter turnout

Official Cat of Soonet
03-20-2015, 09:17 PM
http://www.canada.com/mobile/iphone/story.html?id=50924ae4-5462-48f7-9960-082e77b653dd

Anapeg
03-20-2015, 10:38 PM
I would back enforced voting as long as there were penalties in place for enforcement.

Barry Morris
03-21-2015, 10:49 AM
They don't have a vote for a president so I guess we can't talk about voter turnout

Hmmm. Technically true.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/16428272

But the end result is "voting for the President".

The only people voting for PM are those in his own riding. And if he resigned, or died, not much would change.

BFLPE
03-21-2015, 11:27 AM
I can't see it being a good thing.


But mandatory voting could bring its own set of problems. Haydon Manning, associate professor at Flinders University in Australia, said that country's rules can backfire.

"Turning the vote out might not be a problem, but wooing disengaged citizens now requires banal sloganeering and crass misleading negative advertising," Manning wrote. "To me, this can diminish the democratic experience for those who take the time to think through the issues."

Barry Morris
03-21-2015, 11:41 AM
http://www.canada.com/mobile/iphone/story.html?id=50924ae4-5462-48f7-9960-082e77b653dd

59 percent Canadian turnout.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_el ections

Your site also is from 2008, and US numbers have DROPPED since then, according to some sources.

Official Cat of Soonet
03-21-2015, 12:45 PM
Hmmm. Technically true.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/16428272

But the end result is "voting for the President".

The only people voting for PM are those in his own riding. And if he resigned, or died, not much would change.

Well technically we have the queen and a voter turnout of 0%. Also Gore won the popular vote in 2000 so maybe the end result is not voting for the president? Technically. I just want to make sure we get all the technically's in that we can to serve each of our purposes.

Official Cat of Soonet
03-21-2015, 01:10 PM
In the land of the free, they will retain the right not to care.


Are we just not that into democracy?
Debbie Amaroso is out and Christian Provenzano is in, but fewer than 25,000 people in this city can say they had a hand in picking the city's new mayor, just 40.9 percent of those eligible.
http://www.sootoday.com/content/news/details.asp?c=80662


According to the article, it's not that we don't care, it's that it was raining that day. So Barry, I will concede defeat that we Canadians waive our right to not care but only when the weather is 25 degrees and sunny.

Barry Morris
03-21-2015, 01:59 PM
Are we just not that into democracy?
Debbie Amaroso is out and Christian Provenzano is in, but fewer than 25,000 people in this city can say they had a hand in picking the city's new mayor, just 40.9 percent of those eligible.
http://www.sootoday.com/content/news/details.asp?c=80662


According to the article, it's not that we don't care, it's that it was raining that day. So Barry, I will concede defeat that we Canadians waive our right to not care but only when the weather is 25 degrees and sunny.

Ah, yes, the couch potato vote!!

Official Cat of Soonet
03-21-2015, 02:39 PM
Potatoes cannot vote.

kalam
03-21-2015, 05:07 PM
Potatoes cannot vote.

True, technically.

KaL

Barry Morris
03-21-2015, 06:00 PM
Potatoes cannot vote.

They don't have couches either.

Anapeg
03-21-2015, 08:35 PM
As freedoms slowly slip away under the guise of the "terrorist threat" a larger turnout might just sabotage the government in it's bid to kick down doors and arrest on a whim.

RWGR
03-22-2015, 08:20 AM
In the land of the free, they will retain the right not to care.

Yet even in our apathy we own you.

That has to suck :) :) :)

RWGR
03-22-2015, 08:22 AM
Well technically we have the queen and a voter turnout of 0%. Also Gore won the popular vote in 2000 so maybe the end result is not voting for the president? Technically.

Electoral College.

Official Cat of Soonet
03-22-2015, 08:32 AM
For you guys its technically voting for president but technically in Canada it is not.

KDawg
03-22-2015, 05:16 PM
With all the uninformed morons voting for all their freebees that are out there now doing it voluntarily, how the hell is mandatory voting going to help make our society better?

Barry Morris
03-22-2015, 06:43 PM
With all the uninformed morons voting for all their freebees that are out there now doing it voluntarily, how the hell is mandatory voting going to help make our society better?

How does it work in other countries??

Morons live everywhere.

KDawg
03-23-2015, 07:27 PM
How does it work in other countries??

Morons live everywhere.
It doesn't matter... those people are already disinterested. Forcing more uninformed people to vote is bad.

Barry Morris
03-23-2015, 10:08 PM
It doesn't matter... those people are already disinterested. Forcing more uninformed people to vote is bad.

There is an ultimate fix for that.

Monarchy!!!

RWGR
03-24-2015, 09:24 AM
Shocking that more countries don't have monarchies in this day age. Sure, their golden age was three hundred years ago, but, still.

Bluesky
03-24-2015, 09:47 AM
There is an ultimate fix for that.

Monarchy!!!

You mean like England?
Where they vote? And pay big bucks to support a gelded monarchy?

RWGR
03-24-2015, 10:30 AM
A vast majority of monarchies today are Constitutional Monarchies, where the royal family is merely a figurehead, with no real political power.

Is that the kind of monarchy you want to see, Barry? Or is it the old-fashioned monarchy, like England on the eve of the English Bill of Rights of 1688, where the people had to codify many basic rights we take for granted today?

Official Cat of Soonet
03-24-2015, 10:37 AM
I wouldn't mind a few of these guys. Although to save money I think just growing our hair like this would be better.

http://ww1.hdnux.com/photos/03/77/47/1047000/3/628x471.jpg

Barry Morris
03-24-2015, 10:57 AM
You mean like England?
Where they vote? And pay big bucks to support a gelded monarchy?

As opposed to a "democracy", where the rabble vote themselves bread and circuses???

RWGR
03-24-2015, 11:14 AM
I wouldn't mind a few of these guys. Although to save money I think just growing our hair like this would be better.

http://ww1.hdnux.com/photos/03/77/47/1047000/3/628x471.jpg

Good idea for the big hair of the Big 80s.

RWGR
03-24-2015, 11:17 AM
As opposed to a "democracy", where the rabble vote themselves bread and circuses???

You liked it better when there was no middle class, just the elite 1%, while the other 99% suffered at the extreme poverty level

Official Cat of Soonet
03-24-2015, 11:31 AM
You liked it better when there was no middle class, just the elite 1%, while the other 99% suffered at the extreme poverty level

You know traditions are really hard to let go of. Especially for the older members of society.

RWGR
03-24-2015, 11:33 AM
You know traditions are really hard to let go of. Especially for the older members of society.

The 99% were so much easier to take when they didn't worry about silly stuff, like basic human rights and moving out of a sustenance existence.

Barry Morris
03-24-2015, 11:44 AM
Too bad you and Cat have so little understanding of the workings of a true monarchy.

Here's a hint.

Where 99 percent of the population lives in poverty, a country would be quickly overwhelmed by an aggressive neighbor, and the monarch exiled or killed. The 99 percent would WANT him gone, and they sure wouldn't have the resources to fight for him, or the will.

Barry Morris
03-24-2015, 11:45 AM
You know traditions are really hard to let go of. Especially for the older members of society.

Actually thinking about how the world works is hard, especially for the younger members of society.

Official Cat of Soonet
03-24-2015, 12:12 PM
Actually thinking about how the world works is hard, especially for the younger members of society.

Look at some of the older generation they are learning from. Delusional some are.

Barry Morris
03-24-2015, 12:47 PM
Look at some of the older generation they are learning from. Delusional some are.

Delusional, blind, we all have our problems.

RWGR
03-24-2015, 01:08 PM
Too bad you and Cat have so little understanding of the workings of a true monarchy.


Barry, I teach the difference between Absolute Monarchy and Constitutional Monarchy. And to be honest, I would refuse to accept the answer you gave from one of my sophomores.

RWGR
03-24-2015, 02:00 PM
Too bad you and Cat have so little understanding of the workings of a true monarchy.

Here's a hint.

Where 99 percent of the population lives in poverty, a country would be quickly overwhelmed by an aggressive neighbor, and the monarch exiled or killed.

History has shown this is not the case.

First of all, many monarchs employed mercenaries from other countries to do their fighting. Second, many of the 99% still fought, because they had no choice.

And even if a monarchy was overthrown, what was it usually replaced by? Another monarchy.

Bluesky
03-24-2015, 06:18 PM
Barry, puhleeze... know your stuff before you strut it...

Barry Morris
03-24-2015, 06:39 PM
Barry, puhleeze... know your stuff before you strut it...

I don't see any counter's to my statements. Sorry.

One man cannot rule in a vacuum. That's the way I see it.

The Voice
03-24-2015, 08:05 PM
A vast majority of monarchies today are Constitutional Monarchies, where the royal family is merely a figurehead, with no real political power.

Is that the kind of monarchy you want to see, Barry? Or is it the old-fashioned monarchy, like England on the eve of the English Bill of Rights of 1688, where the people had to codify many basic rights we take for granted today?



Barry said that they didn't teach about the Glorious Revolution when he went to High School so it didn't happen.

Anapeg
03-24-2015, 08:47 PM
I wouldn't mind a few of these guys. Although to save money I think just growing our hair like this would be better.

http://ww1.hdnux.com/photos/03/77/47/1047000/3/628x471.jpg

You have the Royal Canadian Legion Drum and Trumpet Band right here in town, minus the bear skins, we wear forage caps. The uniforms are very similar though.

Barry Morris
03-24-2015, 10:06 PM
Barry said that they didn't teach about the Glorious Revolution when he went to High School so it didn't happen.

Source?? Link??

:) :) :)

RWGR
03-25-2015, 08:47 AM
I don't see any counter's to my statements. Sorry.

.

Barry always complains I don't address certain things he posts. When I do, he comes back with this comment.

Oh well, people can see what's going on, that's good enough for me.

Barry Morris
03-25-2015, 09:02 AM
Ah, let's see, a quick review....

Nope, no substance.

OK!! :) :) :)

Official Cat of Soonet
03-25-2015, 09:07 AM
Ah, let's see, a quick review....

Nope, no substance.

OK!! :) :) :)

Don't be so hard on yourself. You entertain us and the world needs that.

RWGR
03-25-2015, 09:21 AM
Ah, let's see, a quick review....

Nope, no substance.

OK!! :) :) :)

You don't want to discuss how monarchies overthrew monarchies.

Or you can't?