Are elections with only 15.6% participation,like in Houston mayoral, morally valid ? (ethical, legal)

[harrycrat]

In the recent Houston mayoral elections,only 15.6 % of the registered voters participated.

The mayor was elected with 4% plurality...

That kind of elections,in any level.local.state or federal,is legally valid...

However,is it valid ideologically & morally ?

Let me also expand this thread ...

Would u support a Constitutional ( state & federal ) amendment to declare null & void all elections with lower than 50% turnout ?
Those would be regarded as "miselections" ( as in mistrials) & new elections should be held,until a majority of reg voters participate...

What do u think ?

[North Beach Person]

Short answer. Yes. The US does not force people to vote.

[sandyrn0224]

Originally Posted by North Beach Person

Short answer. Yes. The US does not force people to vote.

I agree. If the people don't like the outcome of an election then maybe they ought to get their @sses out there and vote next time.

[Rakin]

Originally Posted by North Beach Person

Short answer. Yes. The US does not force people to vote.

I have to go with this also.

It's sad that so few can control the destiny of so many. Maybe the Govt could provide some incentives or rebates.

It would be a true cash for clunkers program

[harrycrat]

However,it is the equivalent of sentencing a defendant with 2 jurors,out of 11,
with 9 of them absent...

That would be considered a mistrial...

Maybe we should form the term..."miselection "...

[camaro69]

Originally Posted by Rakin

I have to go with this also.

It's sad that so few can control the destiny of so many. Maybe the Govt could provide some incentives or rebates.

It would be a true cash for clunkers program

...and yet, these same people b*tch all the time.

[MIKEETC]

Yes. The election was the result of the will of the people.

[that1guy]

As long as there is nothing barring them from voting, yeah it's all good.

[harrycrat]

Well,I understand the spirit of free will & participation but...15.6% is a disgrace...

Any election with minority participation( < 50% ) poses ethical & ideological questions...

[Swingblade]

Originally Posted by harrymiafl

In the recent Houston mayoral elections,only 15.6 % of the registered voters participated.

The mayor was elected with 4% plurality...

That kind of elections,in any level.local.state or federal,is legally valid...

However,is it valid ideologically & morally ?

Since when did democracy become morale?Are you asking this question because the mayor elect is gay?I am sure the people of Houston knew there was a election and the majority exercised their freedom and choose not to vote.The mayor elect had her base energized and they voted.What would be the difference if a conservative had their base energized and they won a election?
Democracy is nothing but mob rule,who ever has the biggest mob wins and it does not matter if they are right or wrong,it is all about numbers.Does that sound morale?Look at the U S electorate,most of the voters are political and economic imbeciles but they are allowed to vote just because they are 18 or over.And you look at the condition of our country and the quality of our leaders and they resemble the ignorant electorate that voted them in.
Democracy causes a country to be unstable,at one time the country is swinging left then it swings right and back again.I could go on and on,but you should support the decision of the Houston voters they have spoken.Unless your like me,you od support the democratic process don't you?