Quote:
Originally posted by brendy_eire
Do you really think that 37% of people who didn't vote in last election did so because they felt that no party represented them well enough? No, it's also because they couldn't have been arsed, felt it wouldn't have made a difference to the result, or felt that it's pointless voting because nothing will ever change.
1) Yeah quite alot, ever think why?
2) Same as above
3) Definitely, and no way of registering that feeling
Quote:
Originally posted by brendy_eire
If someone isn't happy with the candiadates standing in their constituency, they, IMO, have a social obligation to stand for election themselves. That's the point of a democratic society. People spoiling their votes could hardly be described as democratic.
And what if I wanted to stand and couldn't get the support? For example in the local elections you need 15 people from the area to nominate you. Spoiling you ballot is one way of registering your dissatisfaction, so it is entirely democratic...
Quote:
Originally posted by brendy_eire
IMO, voting should be compulsory. There would be electronic voting, with no 'None of the above' option.
What about the democratic right not to vote? And if you are to have compulsory voting, IMO a "None of the above" would be essential.
Quote:
Originally posted by brendy_eire
As for Martin Cullen being in charge of bringing in the new system, I trust him to do it properly. (and I'm most certainly not a FF man) I don't believe he would be that corrupt as to do anything underhand with the system.
Having the Director of Elections implementing a new voting system, and you don't see a potential conflict? This is also the man that wants to abolish donation limits, and increase the limits for declared donations. I don't necessarily think he would be that corrupt, but there shouldn't be any question marks around the implementation.
Quote:
Originally posted by brendy_eire
As for computer error, there's a greater chance of human error in the counting, so that's a none-issue. As, I think, this whole topic should be. People complain about there not being a paper trial so they can be sure of their vote. Answer me this, the last time you voted, how do you know your vote was properly counted and added to the final total? You don't. You just have to trust that whoever counted it did so correctly and fairly. You trust that this is what happened. Why can't you trust the new system in the same way?
The old system is trustworthy because each vote can be gone over, and re-counts called if necessary. Basically repeating whats been said before, but every stage is checked and verified. As for computer error - take it you don't use computer systems, and Access in particular, that often?
btw As a matter of interest, do you have a vote here or in the North? If it's the North you're happy to argue the case for us to have this system, whilst you happily use the tried and trusted pen and paper...