Why I might not vote.

[Machjo]

Some of you might not be aware tht for each vote a party gets, taxpayers give it $1.83.

Now I'm not a member of any political party, so why should my tax money go to subsidize any party? Of course I could vote for an independent candidate, but there is none in my riding. And think about this for justice. An independent candidate gets not one cent for any of the votes he might get. Yet a member of a party gets money from the party, subsidized by the tax-payer. Hardly an even playing field.

So when the government cuts this subsidy, then maybe I'll consider voting for a member of a party. Until then, i might have to consider abstaining from voting for party-members, or, if all the candidates in the riding are party memers, then abstain from voting altogether.

Thinking of it that way, voting for an independent has a direct impact of $1.83 per voter who votes for him in terms of tax savings, or at least who doesn't vote for any party. So by not voting for any party member, we are saving the government (that's us) $1.83 each.

I haven't decided yet, but it may well be that I don't vote.

 

[Machjo]

Maybe we should do some research to find out why so many don't vote. Some might in fact be abstaining on principle.

 

[Stretch]

any thoughts on compulsory voting like they have in Australia and New Zealand?

 

[Machjo]

any thoughts on compulsory voting like they have in Australia and New Zealand?

I went to he poll today, was debating between a particular candidate I had in mind or none of the above. I even had the pencil in hand, ready to make that X, still unsure.

But in the end, I had to leave the ballot blank.

Compulsory or not, what difference does it make?

 

[scratch]

any thoughts on compulsory voting like they have in Australia and New Zealand?

Just for the kick add compulsory choice to tax return.

 

[Stretch]

I went to he poll today, was debating between a particular candidate I had in mind or none of the above. I even had the pencil in hand, ready to make that X, still unsure.

But in the end, I had to leave the ballot blank.

Compulsory or not, what difference does it make?

firstly, never use a pencil to vote with and secondly, with compulsory voting most feel, well, if I have to vote I best take an interest in what they are saying........

 

[Machjo]

I did take an interest, I went, I took a pencil in hand... and look.

Still no guarantee that they will mark an X. Or worse yet, they might just check off the one at the top!

 

[lone wolf]

That's cool ... for the guy named Aardvark....

 

[Stretch]

there is a small majority that mark 12345 , top to bottom, we have "preferential voting in Australia, something that ensures a 3rd party will find it very hard to rock the 2 party boat.
you took your own pencil?

 

[MissAnnika]

i just dont vote, period.

 

[Outta here]

I don't want to knock anyone who chooses not to vote "on principle", but for the life of me I just can't understand what principle it is they're 'endorsing'.

I realize the selection of candidates and parties is downright woeful most elections, but the onus is upon us as citizens to at least try and put a government in place that will run this country somewhat how we would like to see it run. Most election years, this comes down to voting for the lesser of several evils, but it's still better than letting the worst of them win due to a principle that doesn't count for anything at the polls.

I'm all for upholding principles, don't get me wrong.... but when the principle gets lost in the shuffle and the outcome could make our situation worse, I think sometimes we have to suck it up and play the game with the cards we're dealt.

We have this right - and this obligation... that so many others elsewhere don't have... I think we should respect it enough to use it - even when the pickin's are slim.

 

[Machjo]

I don't want to knock anyone who chooses not to vote "on principle", but for the life of me I just can't understand what principle it is they're 'endorsing'.

I realize the selection of candidates and parties is downright woeful most elections, but the onus is upon us as citizens to at least try and put a government in place that will run this country somewhat how we would like to see it run. Most election years, this comes down to voting for the lesser of several evils, but it's still better than letting the worst of them win due to a principle that doesn't count for anything at the polls.

I'm all for upholding principles, don't get me wrong.... but when the principle gets lost in the shuffle and the outcome could make our situation worse, I think sometimes we have to suck it up and play the game with the cards we're dealt.

We have this right - and this obligation... that so many others elsewhere don't have... I think we should respect it enough to use it - even when the pickin's are slim.

I did use it. I did put a ballot in the box.

Now here's the thing. If I play the game of keeping the worse one out of the game, people will be satisfied with that and then we'll get nowhere.

If, on the other hand, more people should vote none of the above, then maybe when people start to see close republican...oops, sorry... conservative majorites, then maybe they'll wake up and start to demand reform.

So why should I play the game at the cost of reform? I'd rather play the game for reform. I could guarantee that a majority Conservative governmnet might have been the best thing for Canada! Why? Because it would have been such a shocking wake up call that the next election would be unrecognizable.

Unfortunately, with all the strategic voting going on, it will be same as this time next time.

Way to go Canada.