Add "None of the above" to the voting booth ... (2 Viewers)

[hammernnails]

In this era of 2 party dominance (rep/dem) I suggest that we add a new option to the voting booth...

A.... Hillary Clinton

B..... John Mcain

C..... NONE OF THE AVOVE

90% of the time we are forced to choose between the lesser of two evils...

I suggest that if a majority of the people vote "none of the above" the voting be done again with new candidates ... This may sound crazy but it gives an option to people who dislike both candidates...

 

[LSSpam]

C..... NONE OF THE AVOVE

It's called "don't vote".


For some reason the assumption gets made that if you don't vote, you must not be uninformed. Not voting doesn't necessarily mean a lack of familiarity with the campaign, it means you just don't care. And that's often the product of an over-familiarity with the campaign (or at least the process).

 

[threexcharm]

They could have put a "none of the above" button on voting machines for the
last 25-30 years.

Washington is sorely lacking true leadership.

Joe

 

[gboudx]

It's called "don't vote".


For some reason the assumption gets made that if you don't vote, you must not be uninformed. Not voting doesn't necessarily mean a lack of familiarity with the campaign, it means you just don't care. And that's often the product of an over-familiarity with the campaign (or at least the process).

Not really. If you don't vote, it doesn't drive home any point you're trying to make with a "None of the Above" option. Some voters might view voting 3rd party as a "None of the Above", because those candidates have no chance. However, I wouldn't vote 3rd party just for the heck of it.

 

[LSSpam]

Not really. If you don't vote, it doesn't drive home any point you're trying to make with a "None of the Above" option. Some voters might view voting 3rd party as a "None of the Above", because those candidates have no chance. However, I wouldn't vote 3rd party just for the heck of it.

Sure it does.

What do political parties hammer about? "Voter turn-out" What's one of Obama's key strengths "ability to mobilize voters". What's a key aspect of any campaign "momentum/excitement"

Voter turnout is tangible. It has an impact, it sends a message, and it's accounted for.

 

[Jonesy77]

Sure it does.

What do political parties hammer about? "Voter turn-out" What's one of Obama's key strengths "ability to mobilize voters". What's a key aspect of any campaign "momentum/excitement"

Voter turnout is tangible. It has an impact, it sends a message, and it's accounted for.

I see a distinction.

None of the Above = I care about the voting process, am a registered voter, and want my voice to be heard.

Non-voter = Ditto + too lazy to vote + don't care enough to vote + too baked to vote + elections are today? + etc....

 

[gboudx]

Sure it does.

What do political parties hammer about? "Voter turn-out" What's one of Obama's key strengths "ability to mobilize voters". What's a key aspect of any campaign "momentum/excitement"

Voter turnout is tangible. It has an impact, it sends a message, and it's accounted for.

Voter turnout to vote for "None of the Above" sends a message as well. It shows people are willing to get in their car and wait in line to vote for no one. Now, where is Richard Pryor to fund this campaign?

 

[hammernnails]

I see a distinction.

None of the Above = I care about the voting process, am a registered voter, and want my voice to be heard.

Non-voter = Ditto + too lazy to vote + don't care enough to vote + too baked to vote + elections are today? + etc....

This is the exact point that "none of the above" would make...it forces the candidates to actually try to represent the majority of the people.....

 

[Jonesy77]

Voter turnout to vote for "None of the Above" sends a message as well. It shows people are willing to get in their car and wait in line to vote for no one. Now, where is Richard Pryor to fund this campaign?

I love that movie.

The reason not to do this is that why a person votes is irrelevant to the system. What would be the point of adding such a "candidate" to the ballot when electoral votes would be apportioned only toward the individuals running?

Or are you suggesting that "no one" could be elected, and then we sit around for another 2 years with Dubya in office while another field campaigns, holds primaries and then hold elections again? Or even another full 4 years of the incumbant?

 

[hammernnails]

I love that movie.

The reason not to do this is that why a person votes is irrelevant to the system. What would be the point of adding such a "candidate" to the ballot when electoral votes would be apportioned only toward the individuals running?

Or are you suggesting that "no one" could be elected, and then we sit around for another 2 years with Dubya in office while another field campaigns, holds primaries and then hold elections again? Or even another full 4 years of the incumbant?

No No No... My suggestion would be that the partys introduce 2 new candidates and hold a new election in the near future... maybe a month or so.....to allow for a few debates and logistical preperations..

 

[Tapxe]

And what happens if the next candidates are no more satisfactory? Do you then force folks to pick one or rinse and repeat? I can see that being a way to either extend the status quo or push someone through to office.

 

[hammernnails]

And what happens if the next candidates are no more satisfactory? Do you then force folks to pick one or rinse and repeat? I can see that being a way to either extend the status quo or push someone through to office.

If lets say Hillary wins the Dem nomination... but more overall votes would go to Obama.. it would give a chance to the "looser" in the party.... I do see your point about the next candidates... the problem with the system as it is .. is that there are only 2 partys... I would like to see 4 or even 5 partys with a legit shot at winning... The problem is that $$ and the media make this almost impossible... when is the last time you saw a Green Party representive debate on a national level??? it just does not happen....Its liberal republicans or conservative democrats for the foreseeable future...

 

[Pure Energy]

In this era of 2 party dominance (rep/dem) I suggest that we add a new option to the voting booth...

A.... Hillary Clinton

B..... John Mcain

C..... Just say NO to bottled Water!

90% of the time we are forced to choose between the lesser of two evils...

I suggest that the majority of people vote "Just say NO to bottled Water!" ... This may sound crazy but it gives an option to people who dislike both candidates...

Fixed it for ya'

 

[superchuck500]

Voter turnout to vote for "None of the Above" sends a message as well. It shows people are willing to get in their car and wait in line to vote for no one. Now, where is Richard Pryor to fund this campaign?

.

 

[buzd]

Bring back write-ins!!!!

It's still legal, as far as I know.