Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-29-2015, 09:36 AM
eok eok started this thread
 
6,684 posts, read 4,254,134 times
Reputation: 8520

Advertisements

If we changed the rules such that a voter could vote against someone instead of for someone, would it motivate a lot more people to vote? Would it have a big impact on the outcomes of elections?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-29-2015, 11:11 PM
 
Location: Tucson/Nogales
23,222 posts, read 29,066,081 times
Reputation: 32633
I've often wondered if you could vote None Of The Above, and it garnered the majority of the votes, what would happen?

The 2nd highest vote gatherer would be the winner? A call for another election?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2015, 11:29 PM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
38,936 posts, read 23,912,657 times
Reputation: 14125
Judges have a vote for, vote against option. I honestly don't know if any ever truly got voted against enough to lose office.

It is a rather interesting proposition but alas in many states, a no vote don't mean much at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2015, 01:05 AM
 
Location: Texas Hill Country
23,652 posts, read 14,008,920 times
Reputation: 18861
Well, two things.

First of all, it is unlikely that any candidate will be the absolute chosen one of the people. There will probably always be a situation with anyone where significant numbers disagree.

Secondly, what do you do with the current guy in office when no one wins?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2015, 08:01 AM
 
Location: Arizona
1,599 posts, read 1,809,967 times
Reputation: 4917
I think we need rounds of voting, kind of like those competition shows. Start out with 10 candidates, each week put them through a series of rigorous debates and political situations and vote 1 or 2 out. Last man or woman standing wins. We need more options than "this one or that one."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2015, 08:05 AM
 
Location: Cape Cod
24,502 posts, read 17,250,696 times
Reputation: 35800
Voting against someone seems like a good idea. It would certainly be a slap in the face to some of these egomaniacs.

I usually vote for the person who has the least amount of scandals, who doesn't flip flop like a sandal caught in a wave at the beach, who only lies half the time and who might actually have a hint of common sense and intelligence.

In other words I might be staying home come the next election.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2015, 08:13 AM
 
813 posts, read 601,416 times
Reputation: 3160
Every time you vote for one politician you vote against someone else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2015, 10:37 AM
 
Location: Iowa, USA
6,542 posts, read 4,097,684 times
Reputation: 3806
Quote:
Originally Posted by raggedjim View Post
Every time you vote for one politician you vote against someone else.
Actually, you vote against literally everyone else except that one person.

I think we should just do away with the electoral college and make all elections popular votes. I know this would hurt some candidates, but who cares? It would represent the will of the people better.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2015, 11:09 AM
 
Location: Kansas
25,963 posts, read 22,143,367 times
Reputation: 26721
Quote:
Originally Posted by raggedjim View Post
Every time you vote for one politician you vote against someone else.
Yes, what I call it is "Voting for the lesser of the evils."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2015, 11:43 PM
 
Location: Under the Redwoods
3,751 posts, read 7,676,737 times
Reputation: 6118
ha! Love the idea!

Quote:
Originally Posted by tijlover View Post
I've often wondered if you could vote None Of The Above, and it garnered the majority of the votes, what would happen?

The 2nd highest vote gatherer would be the winner? A call for another election?
I have always wanted a none of the above as well.
Another option, if none of above is the popular vote, perhaps work up from there and the winner is the one with the least votes?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:21 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top