If there is another election, will you change your vote?

Fr_Dougal

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Make it mandatory, like in Australia.

If you’re going to force people then you just may as well take the next step and go full dictatorship.

lapua20grain

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

If you’re going to force people then you just may as well take the next step and go full dictatorship.

Was talking to a cousin of mine that lives over there and she says that anybody that doesn't like to vote does what they call a donkey drop we would call it a spoiled vote but they vote nonetheless. They don't seem to be living in a dictatorship as suggested by you.

lapua20grain

lapua20grain wrote: »

Was talking to a cousin of mine that lives over there and she says that anybody that doesn't like to vote does what they call a donkey drop we would call it a spoiled vote but they vote nonetheless. They don't seem to be living in a dictatorship as suggested by you.

You shouldn’t have to go to the polling station at all if you choose not to.

lapua20grain

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

You shouldn’t have to go to the polling station at all if you choose not to.

Your point was if we make it mandatory it would be a dictatorship where it has shown elsewhere that is not true.

Iscreamkone

I’d continue to vote as right wing economically as was possible.
FG-FF
Like the last time I wouldn’t vote SF

lapua20grain

lapua20grain wrote: »

Your point was if we make it mandatory it would be a dictatorship where it has shown elsewhere that is not true.

No I didn’t. Read it again, I said it would be another step.

lapua20grain

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

No I didn’t. Read it again, I said it would be another step.

Bovine scatterings

storker

dxhound2005 wrote: »

The 37% who didn't vote must be laughing at the shambles we produced.

At least we got off our arses and voted for something.

irishfeen

Yes I will change hoping Sinn Féin will run in Cork North West.

lapua20grain

lapua20grain wrote: »

Bovine scatterings

If you’re going to act the little ferret then try read the points clearly first.
“Bovine scatterings” :rolleyes: I suppose you think the stupid remark above has given you a little win now. At least you might land home happy or something because of it, well done.
“No beatings this evening kids, I won at the internet!”

seamus

I won't be changing my vote. Depending on how these negotiations go, I might move FF/FG/SF up or down a few spots, but since I know my vote this year went to my candidate and nowhere else, I have no reason to change.

Drumpot

jon1981 wrote: »

It's actually quite disgusting that 37% don't vote (over 1,000,000 people). 1 in 3 don't vote? And no doubt these people express their opinions of our elected representatives! You have no right.

(P.S I know personal circumstances get in the way, but 37% is too high to use such an excuse to justify such an appalling percentage)

I’d agree with you only there should be an option to tick something that’s a Basically voting that nobody represents you.. The apathy shown by the 37% can be scoffed as showing no interest in voting at all but if you have 37% of people voting that nobody represents them on the ballot paper , new people/candidates will start running to accommodate that portion of society.

Parties won’t add this to the ballot because it’s not in their interest. Let’s not pretend parties give a crap about everybody voting, they are only interested in getting in any which way they can.

Instead of whinging about people not voting , I would advocate we take action to encourage them to get more involved.

lapua20grain

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

If you’re going to act the little ferret then try read the points clearly first.
“Bovine scatterings” :rolleyes: I suppose you think the stupid remark above has given you a little win now. At least you might land home happy or something because of it, well done.
“No beatings this evening kids, I won at the internet!”

Wow you made me out to be someone that beats children from that remark you are some piece of work lad, you are spouting ****e I clearly pointed out that you were wrong as another nation has not slid towards a dictatorship due to mandatory voting. I think you require some type of professional help lad and watch what you insinuate now goodbye I don't want to engage with you further.

jester77

I would only make it mandatory if there was a basic IQ test of some sort involved that would validate the persons vote. Having someone just tick random boxes is worse than having them not vote.

Ficheall

jester77 wrote: »

I would only make it mandatory if there was a basic IQ test of some sort involved that would validate the persons vote. Having someone just tick random boxes is worse than having them not vote.

So, by the same logic, you reckon there should be a basic IQ test now for people who want to vote?

Wanderer78

jester77 wrote: »

I would only make it mandatory if there was a basic IQ test of some sort involved that would validate the persons vote. Having someone just tick random boxes is worse than having them not vote.

so people with higher iq's get more of a say in how we should run our societies?

Drumpot

jester77 wrote: »

I would only make it mandatory if there was a basic IQ test of some sort involved that would validate the persons vote. Having someone just tick random boxes is worse than having them not vote.

And they have to have blue eyes and blonde hair and have clean genes (we can define what that means at a later stage).. We will call them the master voters or maybe the master race , to differentiate them from those beneath them.

Fr_Dougal

jester77 wrote: »

I would only make it mandatory if there was a basic IQ test of some sort involved that would validate the persons vote. Having someone just tick random boxes is worse than having them not vote.

Of a multiple choice quiz on the party manifesto of whichever candidate you give your No.1 to.

Nollog

muzim wrote: »

Well, you have the right to express an opinion, along with a right not to vote if you don't wish to. Whether anyone will listen to the latter is another thing.

I didn't vote as I was looking at the list of candidates and coming to the conclusion that I would be voting for the best of a bad bunch. Would you prefer if I rocked up to spoil my vote to bring down that 37% figure?

If you did spoil, there'd at least be a question about why you did, not that it'd change much.

hurler32

I voted FF but the way Michael Martin is going on next time i'll vote SF.
Plenty from FF would do a coalition with SF, hes more like the leader of FG than FF. Maybe he should join FG. If he ends up doing a coalition deal with FG it'll wipe out both parties. The people want change regardless of his own view.

Wanderer78

hurler32 wrote: »

I voted FF but the way Michael Martin is going on next time i'll vote SF.
Plenty from FF would do a coalition with SF, hes more like the leader of FG than FF. Maybe he should join FG. If he ends up doing a coalition deal with FG it'll wipe out both parties. The people want change regardless of his own view.

mm is a smart man, hes done an incredible job with ff

Ficheall

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Of a multiple choice quiz on the party manifesto of whichever candidate you give your No.1 to.

Though it would have to be an mcq on all the parties' manifestos, otherwise you could run solely on a "better health service" platform (or whatever) and you'd garner first preferences from a load of people who just get the horn from voting.

Necro

hurler32 wrote:

I voted FF but the way Michael Martin is going on next time i'll vote SF. Plenty from FF would do a coalition with SF, hes more like the leader of FG than FF. Maybe he should join FG. If he ends up doing a coalition deal with FG it'll wipe out both parties. The people want change regardless of his own view.

Ha!

What do we want?

CHANGE!

When do we want it?

NOW!

What change do we want?

Errrr......

That's the most annoying buzzword of the current era imo.

Can we outlaw the word change until people articulate exactly what change they want?

dwmcdos

Drumpot wrote: »

And they have to have blue eyes and blonde hair and have clean genes (we can define what that means at a later stage).. We will call them the master voters or maybe the master race , to differentiate them from those beneath them.

Or since it's Ireland we could just ban the ginges from voting

Plumbthedepths

jester77 wrote: »

I would only make it mandatory if there was a basic IQ test of some sort involved that would validate the persons vote. Having someone just tick random boxes is worse than having them not vote.

I would prefer an IQ test for candidates.

Billcarson

Been voting sf since the GE of 2007 and will continue to do so.

seamus

jester77 wrote: »

I would only make it mandatory if there was a basic IQ test of some sort involved that would validate the persons vote. Having someone just tick random boxes is worse than having them not vote.

You see the problem there then, right? He who controls the IQ test, controls the ballot box.

Before you know it, the IQ test will be less about assessing someone's innate intelligence and more about their knowledge of niche historical data.

"What happened on the Falls Road on 6th September 1954"?

"How many FF Taoiseachs have there been?".

"What the process by which a new Táiniste is appointed".

Irrelevant questions that only a certain "type" of person can answer.

Idealistically, the concept itself is fine - that we would expect someone to have a basic level of competence and understanding of what a vote is, before they can use it.

In practice it's impossible to implement without creating a system that will eventually be corrupted.

The thread here just before the election about how PR-STV works is something eye-opening. Not least for the parts that I myself didn't know, but how much the entire population doesn't know. I had to explain it to some pensioners. Intelligent, wealthy people. They had just never looked into it, and the Irish education system never talks about it. Kids leave school at 18, with a vote, having never actually been told how voting works.

I think that was intentional in the early days of the state. A way for the oligarchs and the dynasties to keep voting as a strictly educated pursuit.

Mr Tickle

Ficheall wrote: »

Though it would have to be an mcq on all the parties' manifestos, otherwise you could run solely on a "better health service" platform (or whatever) and you'd garner first preferences from a load of people who just get the horn from voting.

I do like the idea of separating the names/partys from the policies just to make people actually think about what they're voting for.
It would take a nearly superhuman level of objectivity to make it unbiased though. and you;re relying on the parties being honest/realistic in their manifestos.
Maybe an alternative is a large scale mcq that people have to complete prior to voting. A lot of people ignore the election coverage & debates in the run up. This might at least make them consider their position rather than just doing what they've always done.

KWAG2019

FG are very badly rattled by this election result. The SF attacks continue across social media and some prominent govt supporters have lost the plot. It will be very interesting to see how other parties react to FG strategy of trying to provoke another election.

RobbingBandit

Wouldn't give any number to FF they crawled in in quite a few places through bottom of the barrel transfers not putting them down even as number 10 if a new election was called. Never again.