Hey,
I was thinking, should there be a "None" option on our voting ballots? Many people in America do not like any current canidates, whether it be corruption, bad views, etc, but I think they'd still "vote" for "None".
This would increase our voting % and give the US government a better view of citizen's opinions.
2006-11-05 13:18:29 · 13 answers · asked by OwNaGeR 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Oh, how I love this question!
If we did not like any of the candidates, we could vote None Of The Above! Gads! We would never have a vote!
Although the question has merits, it would never solve the problem. None of us can always like all of the candidates, afterall they lie like ... well you know, like politicians!
The US government really does not care of your opinion! Everything is already controlled by a group of bankers, the rich and politicians known as The Trilateral Commission!
Google The Trilaterial Commission ... look at the names of past and present members. You should be very surprised! At the very least, offended!
So, in answer to your question, although I personally like the idea of "None of The Above", it would not work because the situation has already been decided. You really do not have a say in it!
This is also the reason why JFK was murdered! He chose to stand up against the TC and was exicuted for his decision.
This is just My Humble Opinion!
Hope this helps,
The Ol' Sasquatch Ü
2006-11-05 13:38:15 · answer #1 · answered by Ol' Sasquatch 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why the rush to know the result so quickly? A lot of the problems in recent years with disputed US elections has been due to quick technological machines (punch cards, Diebold machines etc) that seem ultimately to produce less trustworthy results. In the UK, everyone still uses ballot papers. You mark an X in the box next to the candidate you want to vote for. You fold it up and put them into a sealed see through ballot box (so no-one can stuff it first). The box is transported, still sealed, to a central counting where it is hand counted. All the candidates and their representatives can be at the count and can at any time demand votes or a section thereof are re-counted. It takes a lot longer for the results to come out BUT I can't think of an occasion where there has ever been a case where the voting public has been unsure about the accuracy of the results.
2016-05-22 02:26:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That would be wonderful. There is a caveat, however...who would run the gubment? I personally think the only person who is fully qualified is me and that would make me a dictator. Alas, I'm the only person who would vote for me but I'd win because everybody would be too busy voting for nobody. The trains would run on time, to be sure, but it wouldn't be very much fun. I agree that there should be a space on the ballot for each office and then you could, at least, cast your vote for somebody. If everybody voted for nobody who would run the show? Everybody would be upset but nobody would be responsible. Everybody would want somebody to take the blame. How would that help anybody?
2006-11-05 13:31:12 · answer #3 · answered by happygogilmore2004 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
How would it increase our voting %, if your at the ballot box, you are in the %, and what would be solved if we elected noone to a position,( that is if I interpret your position correctly), if that is not how you see it I dont think they care how many peope dont vote, just so that the people who do vote, vote for them.
2006-11-05 13:22:27 · answer #4 · answered by asmith1022_2006 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
here is a none option...leave it blank in that area.
To have 10000 votes cast and the candidates get 9999 between them says something, especilly if many refuse to vote for the morons offered.
2006-11-05 13:26:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If I don't like the person's politics and no one is running against them, I just leave it blank. I have learned that after the election is over, politicians or their staff pore over the stats. They know how many people voted and how many votes they received. It may surprise you to know that it bothers them when their name is left blank.
2006-11-05 14:59:31 · answer #6 · answered by Ceci 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you want to make a statement with your "None" category, you can do this by filling the Write-in Candidate with "None" or like many people have done in the past put in "Mickey Mouse".
2006-11-05 13:30:36 · answer #7 · answered by Figure it out! 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You always have the option to vote for no candidate if you want.
2006-11-05 13:21:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes ... because there is a BIG difference between "not voting" and having "no one to vote for" .... Simple as that, to my li'l mind.
2006-11-05 13:21:27 · answer #9 · answered by BOBo 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, because republicans are the do nothing party of unfunded mandates, the "none" vote would go to them.
2006-11-05 13:44:21 · answer #10 · answered by david n 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋