No, I don't think voting should be mandatory. However, if you don't vote, you forfeit the right to complain about something over which you may have had control.
No. When people are forced to do things that they don't want or care about doing, many times they do it half-assed. Voting is something that should be taken very seriously, as it has enormous consequences... for many years to come.
Voters are like a hiring manager. Their job is to read an applicant's resume, evaluate their ability to do the job (past experience and such), and then decide whether or not they think that person can do the job. It's their job to thoroughly examine a proposition and evaluate it as best they can, not let someone else or an organization tell them what to do. Voting is a serious responsibility that should never be taken lightly. Forcing it on people will only make fewer people want sign up to be a hiring manager (register to vote). If one isn't willing to take the time to be a serious hiring manager, then they shouldn't register to be one in the first place.
I agree completely. Unfortunately, many people don't look into the qualifications of the candidates and their voting records before deciding on their vote. In some cases, none of the candidates are ideal, so we wind up choosing the least mediocre candidate or vote against a candidate rather than for someone.
Many people refuse to take the time to look into it. If they thought it was important enough, they'd find the time (people always find time to do what they think is important.)
Yes, many times the pool of applicants yields no one of caliber (more often than not it seems). Unfortunately, one can't change the applicant pool, and the job must be filled. However, one still needs to carefully look at the resumes, past experience, and such of the applicants in order to determine which one is the 'least mediocre'; and not just take someone else's or some organization's word for it.
You're right. I also was disturbed by the fact that a couple of the Democratic debates were shown on channels that I do not get with my cable subscription. All debates should be on channels that everyone gets. I will not sit in front of my computer for three hours to watch a debate.
Nope it's not But let's be clear, 1 assemblyman from California introduced the bill, not the state. It no more constitutional than bills to outlaw homosexuality, or to force prayer in schools and public events, or force people to pledge allegiance to the flag, or force people to be Christian, or... Do your research. All of those items I listed were introduced at one point or another by a republican.
This post was edited by Jon at February 6, 2020 8:10 AM MST
No Republican has tried to make prayer or pledge of allegiance or a religion mandatory. That is Democrat territory and this recently brought bill in Sacramento is from a Democrat. It goes against both freedom and liberty. We have the freedom to do these things. Not a mandate to do them.
Republicans are awful people and just because someone can sti8ck their head in their butt, doesn't make it so. Both parties are guilty, but to stick your head where the sun doesn't shine is foolish
This post was edited by Jon at February 7, 2020 10:18 AM MST
No, that is not what happened. The left always twist.... State Sen Allen of Arizona has never presented a bill that would require mandatory church attendence. They were debating about guns and she was making the argument that we need to fix our morals to address the gun problem.
Here is her quote: "Probably we should be debating a bill requiring every American to attend a church of their choice on Sunday to see if we can get back to having a moral rebirth," adding "that would never be allowed."
Pay attention. If you want to think that every dem of prog is represented by this guys views, then that mean that every con and republican agrees with the conservative republican preacher who wants to execute gays. Im sick if this tit-for-tat.
This post was edited by Jon at February 8, 2020 8:15 AM MST
I don't know how it tallies with the USA Constitution - but I've always had the impression that each state has great latitude in how it organises its own politics.
It can be hard to see outside the spectrum of what has always been familiar. In my view, as an Australian, I can say that compulsory voting has always worked well for us.
There are three ways that Australians who seriously object to voting can avoid it without paying a penalty. 1. Some avoid registering on the electoral roll - which works pretty well so far because not many do it. If it ever became a significant problem, the govt could use driver's licenses, Medicare cards, property ownership and tax details to track down the majority of the unlisted. 2. Vote "informal". This happens when the citizen turns up, has their name registered as having voted, and then numbers the boxes in a way that invalidates the vote - for instance, by putting an "0" against every candidate's name or scrawling "I object to voting" across the top of the form. Because the votes go into the boxes in a way that is anonymous, no one can ever trace who the non-voter was. 3. Don't show up to the hustings on the day and don't lodge a postal or absentee vote. Sometime later, the electoral office will send a fine or please explain notice. Some explanations, such as being unexpectedly ill on the day, will be accepted without a fine. However, I doubt they would accept a record of multiple elections in which the voter always tendered an excuse.
For the most part, Australians accept that it is a civic duty to participate in the democratic process even if it's only at the most minimal level of voting once every three years at Federal, State and local council levels. Personally, I feel immensely privileged to live in a democracy, and I would never wish to give up the right or the duty to vote.
I do not think it should be a requirement. I do like the idea of using the DL to register to vote. Our expire on a reg basis. Of course, only citizens should be allowed to vote. And thd DMV already requires proof for a "Real ID" here. And it take the money out of registering people to vote here. But not mandatory voting. I want people to vote who care enough to bother. These are more likely to know more about the issues.
SpunkySenior 