Voter Turnout

Will you vote in this civic election?

Yes
30
97%
No
1
3%
 
Total votes: 31

User avatar
Lady tehMa
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 19376
Joined: Aug 2nd, 2005, 3:51 pm

Voter Turnout

Post by Lady tehMa »

The purpose of this thread is to discuss voter turnout.

What do you think it will be for this civic election?

How do you think the city could encourage higher voter turnout?

Maybe we can get Glacier to give us some graphs of turnout for previous elections if he can find the data online.

Do you plan on voting? If so, why or why not?
PLEASE use spellcheck. If that is too hard, consider installing the Grammarly (free!) app that will not only spellcheck for you (AND offer corrections!) but also make sure that your sentences are grammatically correct.

You're welcome.
User avatar
cv23
Guru
Posts: 8009
Joined: Jul 4th, 2005, 2:59 pm

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by cv23 »

Lady tehMa wrote:
How do you think the city could encourage higher voter turnout?



Personally I think voting should be mandatory but unfortunately enforcement would likely be far more costly than the actual election.
I'm not sure where I heard/read it but the suggestion of a lottery for those voting has been made. The idea was that every voters name was placed in a "hat" and a name drawn. The voter who's name is drawn would get to live tax free for the next year.
An idea something along those lines if it only be relief from property taxes for a year certainly would improve the pathetic voter turnout we have seen here in the past.
User avatar
Lady tehMa
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 19376
Joined: Aug 2nd, 2005, 3:51 pm

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by Lady tehMa »

That is a fantastic idea, I'm pretty sure most people would be on board for that! Most property owners, anyway. I wonder how we could motivate non-property owners. . . for them maybe they could have an option of a credit towards utilities or something?
PLEASE use spellcheck. If that is too hard, consider installing the Grammarly (free!) app that will not only spellcheck for you (AND offer corrections!) but also make sure that your sentences are grammatically correct.

You're welcome.
User avatar
cv23
Guru
Posts: 8009
Joined: Jul 4th, 2005, 2:59 pm

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by cv23 »

Lady tehMa wrote:That is a fantastic idea, I'm pretty sure most people would be on board for that! Most property owners, anyway. I wonder how we could motivate non-property owners. . . for them maybe they could have an option of a credit towards utilities or something?


How about a utility credit, or even a cheque, in the amount of the average annual property tax within the municipality?
CJT84
Board Meister
Posts: 442
Joined: Mar 16th, 2009, 12:08 pm

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by CJT84 »

cv23 wrote:
Lady tehMa wrote:
How do you think the city could encourage higher voter turnout?



Personally I think voting should be mandatory but unfortunately enforcement would likely be far more costly than the actual election.
I'm not sure where I heard/read it but the suggestion of a lottery for those voting has been made. The idea was that every voters name was placed in a "hat" and a name drawn. The voter who's name is drawn would get to live tax free for the next year.
An idea something along those lines if it only be relief from property taxes for a year certainly would improve the pathetic voter turnout we have seen here in the past.


I personally think voting is a right and no one should be forced to do it though it is in their interest to do so and I encourage people to vote. The lottery idea is silly too as you'll get people voting just for that, you won't get them to care about candidates any more than they did before. It'll just make a nicer statistic on voter turnout.

Better idea is have a day holiday for voting day.
ATS
Posts: 12
Joined: Jun 11th, 2008, 4:23 pm

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by ATS »

It is the year 2011 time for voting to get into this century and have a way to vote online.
User avatar
Tacklewasher
Übergod
Posts: 1374
Joined: Jul 9th, 2008, 6:45 am

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by Tacklewasher »

cv23 wrote:Personally I think voting should be mandatory but unfortunately enforcement would likely be far more costly than the actual election.


The only way I could accept mandatory voting is if each ballot included a "none of the above" option. I have no desire into being forced to "hold my nose and vote" if I am not happy with the candidates. And I would go out of my way to not vote if it became mandatory without such an option (regardless to how I felt about the candidates).
User avatar
cv23
Guru
Posts: 8009
Joined: Jul 4th, 2005, 2:59 pm

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by cv23 »

Tacklewasher wrote:
cv23 wrote:Personally I think voting should be mandatory but unfortunately enforcement would likely be far more costly than the actual election.


The only way I could accept mandatory voting is if each ballot included a "none of the above" option. I have no desire into being forced to "hold my nose and vote" if I am not happy with the candidates. And I would go out of my way to not vote if it became mandatory without such an option (regardless to how I felt about the candidates).


You wouldn't have to "hold your nose to vote" as a spoiled ballot speaks very loudly as "none of the above". Obviously if there were more spoiled ballots than acceptable ones or a very high percentage of spoiled ballots something would have to be done. Atleast by spoiling a ballot your voice that "none of the above" were acceptable to you your voice would be heard while simply not voting leaves your voice unheard and only strengthens the voice of those who vote for one of the candidates on the ballot.
How about a rule in a mandatory vote that says something like if the amount of spoiled ballots exceeds the amount of acceptable ones the results are voided and a new slate of candidates must be presented to the voters? Sure that could lead to endless elections but its a place to start.
Mandatory vote or not we need to do something to get the apathetic masses off their couches and become part of the democratic process that is going to forge our community's, province's, and country's future. Right now it is only a clear minority who's voices are being heard and represented not the majority's as the process was intended to represent.
CJT84
Board Meister
Posts: 442
Joined: Mar 16th, 2009, 12:08 pm

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by CJT84 »

cv23 wrote:
Tacklewasher wrote:
cv23 wrote:Personally I think voting should be mandatory but unfortunately enforcement would likely be far more costly than the actual election.


The only way I could accept mandatory voting is if each ballot included a "none of the above" option. I have no desire into being forced to "hold my nose and vote" if I am not happy with the candidates. And I would go out of my way to not vote if it became mandatory without such an option (regardless to how I felt about the candidates).


You wouldn't have to "hold your nose to vote" as a spoiled ballot speaks very loudly as "none of the above". Obviously if there were more spoiled ballots than acceptable ones or a very high percentage of spoiled ballots something would have to be done. Atleast by spoiling a ballot your voice that "none of the above" were acceptable to you your voice would be heard while simply not voting leaves your voice unheard and only strengthens the voice of those who vote for one of the candidates on the ballot.
How about a rule in a mandatory vote that says something like if the amount of spoiled ballots exceeds the amount of acceptable ones the results are voided and a new slate of candidates must be presented to the voters? Sure that could lead to endless elections but its a place to start.
Mandatory vote or not we need to do something to get the apathetic masses off their couches and become part of the democratic process that is going to forge our community's, province's, and country's future. Right now it is only a clear minority who's voices are being heard and represented not the majority's as the process was intended to represent.


Spoiling a ballot is technically not voting. It would be better to teach kids in high school abut political parties, how the process works, what an electoral board does, how to be involved or even start their own party on a local level. We tend to teach kids all about theoretical politics and policy theory (Poli Sci major here) but very rarely about practical politics (managing a campaign, setting up a lobby group or political committee). The result is that people might want to get involved but those already in parties act as gatekeepers and people have no idea where to start without going through already established parties. Make political education more robust and maybe more people will be involved and you won't have to force them to vote.
User avatar
Glacier
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 33657
Joined: Jul 6th, 2008, 10:41 pm

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by Glacier »

I've said this before, but I'll say it again. There seems to be a big push afoot to get everyone out to vote, but I do not agree with this approach. Really, what good does it do for democracy if we go around rounding up dementia ridden folks at hospitals and whatnot if they don't even know who's running? Why are we diluting the pool of active voters (people who are taking the time and energy to get informed and/or interested with the issues of the day) with people who have no desire or wherewithal to partake? We live in a liberal democracy where we should have the freedom to not vote. That's kind of the point of the freedoms our ancestors fought and died for - the freedom to not only take part choosing the government, but also the freedom to not do so. The last thing democracy needs it another tyrannical government forcing us to take part in a supposed choice. So much for freedom of choice at that point.

Here's a question for you voters, why would you complain about low voter turnout? Think about it, your vote loses value as the % of population choosing the vote increases, therefore, it's in your best interest to have a lower voter turnout... Yes, I'm being somewhat factious here, but I still contend that we would be better off developing strategies that get people interested in politics, than simply guilting them into getting out to vote for something they don't a clue about.

There's also a lot of hysteria out there about the lack of young people voting as well. Well, so what. People take longer to mature than they did in previous generations (we don't get married at 14 anymore do we), so as long as they are voting by say age 30, who cares. Anyway, even with all the "low voter turnouts", we still have far more people voting now than we did a 100 years ago (as a percentage of the population)...

histor4.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by Glacier on Nov 9th, 2011, 1:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
cv23
Guru
Posts: 8009
Joined: Jul 4th, 2005, 2:59 pm

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by cv23 »

CJT84 wrote:Spoiling a ballot is technically not voting.

I disagree.
Intentionally spoiling a ballot involves actually going to the polling station, checking in and receiving a ballot which you physically place in the ballot box. Not voting is sitting at home on your couch and then complaining about the election results.
Maybe it would be simpler if we worked along the lines of a recall. If a candidate doesn't achieve a certain percentage of votes from the possible voters in the riding then they would not be considered as elected?
Maybe a whole election should just be considered invalid if a minimum percentage of possible voters don't actually cast, or spoil, ballots?
User avatar
grammafreddy
Chief Sh*t Disturber
Posts: 28548
Joined: Mar 17th, 2007, 10:52 am

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by grammafreddy »

Glacier wrote:I've said this before, but I'll say it again. There seems to be a big push afoot to get everyone out to vote, but I do not agree with this approach. Really, what good does it do for democracy if we go around rounding up dementia ridden folks at hopsicals and whatnot if they don't even know who's running? Why are we diluting the pool of active voters (people who are taking the time and energy to get informed and/or interested with the issues of the day) with people who have no desire or wherewithal to partake? We live in a liberal democracy where we should have the freedom to not vote. That's kind of the point of the freedoms our ancestors fought and died for - the freedom to not only take part choosing the government, but also the freedom to not do so. The last thing democracy needs it another tyrannical government forcing us to take part in a supposed choice. So much for freedom of choice at that point.

The real question for you who vote, why would you complain about low voter turnout? Think about it, your vote loses value as the % of population choosing the vote increases, therefore, it's in your best interest to have a lower voter turnout... Yes, I'm being somewhat factious here, but I still contend that we would be better off developing strategies that get people interested in politics, than simply guilting them into getting out to vote for something they don't a clue about.

There's also a lot of hysteria out there about the lack of young people voting as well. Well, so what. People take longer to mature than they did in previous generations (we don't get married at 14 anymore do we), so as long as they are voting by say age 30, who cares. Anyway, even with all the "low voter turnouts", we still have far more people voting now than we did a 100 years ago (as a percentage of the population)...

histor4.png


GREAT POST!!! 100 thumbs up for that!
__________________________________________________________________________________________
We are a generation of idiots - smart phones and dumb people.

You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
User avatar
Lady tehMa
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 19376
Joined: Aug 2nd, 2005, 3:51 pm

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by Lady tehMa »

Perhaps the push then should be towards educating the populace and creating interest in voting amongst a knowledgeble base?

The problem with that (that I have seen) is that when being taught about politics there is usually a bias towards one party or another. The boards are full of such people, the election threads show that clearly enough. So, how to create interest in politics, in an unbiased but erudite populace? Is this even possible? :137:
PLEASE use spellcheck. If that is too hard, consider installing the Grammarly (free!) app that will not only spellcheck for you (AND offer corrections!) but also make sure that your sentences are grammatically correct.

You're welcome.
User avatar
cv23
Guru
Posts: 8009
Joined: Jul 4th, 2005, 2:59 pm

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by cv23 »

Glacier wrote: Anyway, even with all the "low voter turnouts", we still have far more people voting now than we did a 100 years ago (as a percentage of the population)...

histor4.png

Could you please state the source of your information and graph?
User avatar
Glacier
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 33657
Joined: Jul 6th, 2008, 10:41 pm

Re: Voter Turnout

Post by Glacier »

cv23 wrote:Could you please state the source of your information and graph?

Simon Fraser University... http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/elections/his ... rnout.html

I recommend reading the "Voter Turnout in Historical Perspective" section at the bottom.

Return to “C.E. General Discussion”