English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

im sick of hearing whingers complain that they dont like the current government, i bet if i asked half they would say that they didnt vote. Complusory voting would also eliminate the aguement that poorer people get left out.

If you say no try to have a reason, and dont say that it doesnt work because it does, Eg. Australia, dont say that america is to large compared because we do it state by state here anyway not a whole country.

2006-07-30 23:44:50 · 7 answers · asked by bearer4now 1 in Politics & Government Civic Participation

how am i a dumb A$$, how does making sure that the government is choosen by all the people (not just the rich) impead on your right to freedom, FOOL.

2006-07-31 00:02:26 · update #1

7 answers

Voting in and of itself means nothing. The smallest minority in USA does not need to vote, nor does it matter that they vote. They are the super-rich. Voting is at best a show for them. No matter what happens they will be unaffected by the outcome. They are to a high degree insulated.

The notion of choosing the lesser of 2 evils is similar to choosing between manure pie and manure cake, when manure is not anywhere your idea of nourishment.

The people do not vote for their government. They vote for adminstrators of their government, Public Servants, Civil Servants; in other words, the help.

The PEOPLE are the government: (See the US Constitution & Emancipation Proclamation)

"We the_ _ _ _ _ _ in order to form a more perfect union."

" a goverment of the _ _ _ _ _ _, by the _ _ _ _ _ _ , for the _ _ _ _ _ _

There should be a null vote (none of the above) that would count against all candidates. If the candidates do not get the amount of votes more than the null, they should be scrapped and an entire new batch found.

If you could force someone to vote, then you could force for whom to vote.

2006-07-31 00:07:20 · answer #1 · answered by LeBlanc 6 · 1 0

No, America should not have compulsory voting. First of all, voting is a right and a privilege, it is not something that we FORCE people to do. If they choose to exercise their rights, then fine. If they choose not to, fine too. America is about choice, not about compulsion.

Secondly, what is the point in having a bunch of morons cast votes? If one doesn't know what they are voting for, why would you want them to vote? I'd rather have those who pay attention to the issues and understand them make the decisions rather than a large horde of lemmings doing what the TV tells them to do.

Thirdly, the costs of compulsory voting alone would be astronomical. In the last election we had record turnout for voting and there were some places with extremely long lines and waits. In order to have enough space for everyone to vote, we would have to open thousands of new voting places. We would have to furnish them with voting machines and man them with people to watch the vote.

More importantly, I'd like to hear a reasonable reason FOR compulsory voting other than the fact that you're sick of listening to non-voting whiners.

2006-07-31 03:58:48 · answer #2 · answered by Goose&Tonic 6 · 0 0

that would be wonderful if you like dictatorship.
most Americans prefer freedom.
poor cant get time off jobs to vote or sometimes cant get there at all. in some states they have, recently even, been actually discouraged.
people often don't take the time to learn about critical issues and select good candidates.
its sad more don't vote.
how bush got reelected is beyond me. its very sad and since he lied to us and made lots of money while jacking up the debt for generations to come to pay off and killed off our troops for some fast oil and construction profits and many more bad things and is basically not too bright and also is causing many in the world to not like America
Not whining and loudly would be irresponsible!
See how many people you personally can get to discuss issues and get registered to vote.

2006-07-31 02:49:23 · answer #3 · answered by macdoodle 5 · 0 1

first of all dumb ass, compulsory voting would not be something a DEMOCRACY does, Get it? How could we call ourselves a free country and then demand that it's citizens vote? There are some that think that criticizing our government is wrong and shouldn't be allowed also. We should vote or not vote criticize or not. That's called freedom of choice

2006-07-30 23:56:21 · answer #4 · answered by jerzeme 2 · 0 1

No, united states of america would not have mandatory vote casting. at the start, vote casting is a precise and a privilege, it is not something that we stress human beings to do. in the event that they choose for to workout their rights, then nice. in the event that they choose for to no longer, nice too. united states of america is approximately decision, no longer approximately compulsion. Secondly, what's the element in having a team of morons forged votes? If one does not comprehend what they are vote casting for, why could you want them to vote? i could extremely have people who pay interest to the matters and comprehend them make the selections extremely than an excellent horde of lemmings doing what the television tells them to do. Thirdly, the expenses of mandatory vote casting on my own could be astronomical. interior the final election we had checklist turnout for vote casting and there have been some places with incredibly long lines and waits. with a view to have sufficient room for each guy or woman to vote, we could would desire to open hundreds of recent vote casting places. we could would desire to furnish them with vote casting machines and guy them with human beings to observe the vote. greater importantly, i could want to hearken to a lifelike reason of mandatory vote casting different than the actuality which you're unwell of listening to non-vote casting whiners.

2016-10-01 07:13:29 · answer #5 · answered by robinette 4 · 0 0

no, too many laws are created to protect the stupid, we cannot have the stupid putting people in office too. (i know, it already looks like we do.) kinda feels like violating the law of natural selection to me.

2006-07-30 23:49:09 · answer #6 · answered by daddio 7 · 0 0

No, it would be unconstitutional.

2006-07-31 00:02:24 · answer #7 · answered by rhymingron 6 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers