What I mean by "worse" is the idea that if I have to show up (because I'm not going to pay up) and I'm no more informed that I was before voting was mandatory what good is my vote then? At what point does your voter turnout actually vote based on something other than primacy or euphonious names, or perceived ethnic heritage, or a bunch of other things that are unrelated to platform? How long before the voters become even vaguely educated? Also, is random voting more likely than simply spoiling a ballot?
Oh. In that case, your issue is a furphy. I don't support any argument which relies on saying someone else's vote is less valuable than mine. Hell, over half of the voters in 2004 voted for Bush. Aside from my personal biases on the issue, there've been studies linked to on these boards indicating that a majority of them didn't actually know his platform. I don't know how this played on the Democratic side, but non-compulsory voting is a poor indicator of informed voting.
What's a postal vote? Is that like an absentee ballot?
Yep. What's the rationale for limiting postal voting in America? Does it involve more work, or is it the delay in getting a result, or something else?
When did Australia institute mandatory voting? Do you have turnout numbers from just before then until the numbers started levelling out?
It was introduced in 1924. The notion of so many soldiers dying in WWI to defend "the Australian way" played into it. The turnout at the previous election (1922) was under 60%, the one subsequent (1925) was over 90%.
In that case, your issue is a furphy.
What's a furphy?
And I do subscribe to the idea that some votes are worth more than others. Why the random ordering on Australian Ballots if not to minimalise the effect of some sorts of random voting?
The turnout at the previous election (1922) was under 60%, the one subsequent (1925) was over 90%.
Has it been over 90% the whole time?
I would like to see the national elections made a major holiday, with no work, so that more people can vote more easily. I'd like to see companies have to give paid time off to people (an hour or whatever) to vote in their local elections. I would like to see registration standardized and simplified, nation-wide. I would like to see all sorts of improvements in this area.
Yeah, I think those are great ideas. In Australia the election can be on any day of the week, and has been on Saturday for at least the length of time I've been voting, for that reason. Works great unless some twit tries to schedule it on Grand Final day.
Oh, by the way, most of the time I get a public holiday for your elections. Melbourne Cup Day is also a first Tuesday in November kind of deal. Isn't that ironic?
I'd like to see companies have to give paid time off to people (an hour or whatever) to vote in their local elections.
According to the bigass "KNOW YOUR RIGHTS!" info board posted in my office's kitchen, employers (in NY state, at least) have to give employees 2 hours at either the beginning of the end of their shift to vote, if the employee does not have 4 hours of their own time to spare.
According to the bigass "KNOW YOUR RIGHTS!" info board posted in my office's kitchen, employers (in NY state, at least) have to give employees 2 hours at either the beginning of the end of their shift to vote, if the employee does not have 4 hours of their own time to spare.
Is it compensated or uncompensated, Jess?
Happy late b-day to ND!!!
Owen and Deena!Babies are adorable. Love the monkey cake!! I want one for my b-day next month.
I'm now calling into a conf call from hell.
t cries and cries
Edit to change not to now. Freudian slip there?
Vote by mail does not take very long at all.
But I am a big old wonk these days, and not at all sympathetic to the "they're all crooked, so who cares" argument, for instance.
What's a furphy?
Ah. Another Australianism (now I'm back home, I don't police my language for international consumption as tightly). Basically an erroneous or improbable story.
Why the random ordering on Australian Ballots if not to minimalise the effect of some sorts of random voting?
Another furphy (ask for it by name!). Donkey voting isn't the same thing as uninformed voting, it's closer to an intent to register an invalid vote. Random ordering isn't intended as an intelligence test.
Has it been over 90% the whole time?
Yep. The first election was the lowest turnout, in recent years it's been around 95%. Interestingly, the Senate vote is generally slightly higher than the House vote.
Vote by mail does not take very long at all. But I am a big old wonk these days, and not at all sympathetic to the "they're all crooked, so who cares" argument, for instance.
Yes, even though it is true. We're looking for a plumb line. Skewed? We can work with. Fusilli? Not so much.
