Incorrect. My ballot was accepted. Yay, black box.MGS3_GrayFox wrote:
Your ballot is invalid because you did not finish it. So you wasted your vote.imortal wrote:
You think it is better to just scratch through the candidates, or spoil the ballot in some way, and still expect it to count? Wny not write in the name "N. O. Body" to make your point? Is the act of 'spoiling' it, ie defacement, a critical element in your act? YOu can also simply leave it blank. I left several areas blank when I voted; there were several state positions where the candidate did not have an opponant. I left them blank rather than adding to the number of people that voted for them simply because there was no choice.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
If that's true of the US system, then that's shit. It's very important for any electoral system to have a way for the electorate to say "we don't want any of those bunch". Though, I guess write-ins can play that role - but it means mixing the messages - does the electorate then mean "we want this other guy" or not?
Better to sell it than to waste it on a third party (or not voting at all).
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Sould you vote, even if you don't want either Canadate to win?
You might as well vote 3rd party, as you said. The reason being that... if enough people support 3rd parties, they may actually become viable in the long run.cpt.fass1 wrote:
Now this is something that really plagues me.. I really don't want to vote, because I don't want to support either of the two parties and there failure to act and unanswered promises. I feel it's just a waste of my time, if I do go I'd vote third party that ,even if they got the popular vote, would get blocked by the Electoral Collage.
So should I really waste my time and go vote, because it's my right?
Also, there's a much greater chance we'll get rid of the Electoral College if a 3rd party rises in power. Once more than 2 political parties become the norm for a system, the greater the chance is that a victory is won by plurality. For example, when Perot was in the 1992 election, Clinton won with less than 50% of the vote. The Electoral College exaggerates this effect by implementing a winner-takes-all principle in each state (with the exceptions of Nebraska and New Hampshire, I think).
So, as long as the winner-takes-all principle remains, it greatly increases the chance that a candidate can have an electoral landslide while still getting a much smaller portion of the popular vote. When such a great difference between the popular vote and the electoral vote develops, it generally makes ending the Electoral College a more attractive proposal to the average citizen.
So yeah... support a 3rd party... you might help push forward the end of the absurd Electoral College in the process.
Wrong.MGS3_GrayFox wrote:
Your ballot is invalid because you did not finish it. So you wasted your vote.
Ballots are still accepted without a vote for every section. Thus the problems of 2000. "Does this look like they tried to vote for _______, or is it just my eyes?
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Sould you vote, even if you don't want either Canadate to win?