egafd.com

I know that's how it is, but it isnt fair. I would have liked there to have been a general election in 1990 when Thatcher resigned, just like Neil Kinnock wanted, and there should have been, in my view, a general election when Blair went. People within the party chosing who will lead the nation is not democratic, the people should decide. I mean do you think it would be a good thing for Cameron to impress the public so much in the next month or two, then the Tories win, and the following day he quits and someone else just becomes PM? Hardly be fair would it, the public would have largely voted in the Tories because they think Cameron would be a good PM for them.

Bob Singleton wrote:

> Some people say that compulsory voting would increase voter knowledge of the issues. This is pure bunkum.

Perhaps, but for some - feckless, ignorant, naive etc - it may actually underline the importance of voting (why else make it compulsory?), which would at least be a start.

However, though I've always in some ways considered not voting as ultimately selfish, I'd have to agree on not making it compulsory. You make some good points on this issue, btw.

The Last Word wrote:

>
> Perhaps, but for some - feckless, ignorant, naive etc - it may
> actually underline the importance of voting (why else make it
> compulsory?), which would at least be a start.


Perhaps, but I'd personally prefer a low turnout of voters, made up mostly of people who at least understand the issues, than a very high turnout where the majority have no interest or understanding, but are simply doing so to avoid a fine!


>
> However, though I've always in some ways considered not voting
> as ultimately selfish, I'd have to agree on not making it
> compulsory. You make some good points on this issue, btw.
>

Not voting can only be selfish when, others having lost their lives to allow us this right, those not voting do so through indolence, ignorance and apathy. A person who, having weighed up all the pros and cons of the various candidates and then decides not to vote is not being selfish. Maybe the answer is to have "None of the Above" on the ballot paper?

Bob Singleton wrote:

> Not voting can only be selfish when, others having lost their
> lives to allow us this right, those not voting do so through
> indolence, ignorance and apathy. A person who, having weighed
> up all the pros and cons of the various candidates and then
> decides not to vote is not being selfish. Maybe the answer is
> to have "None of the Above" on the ballot paper?

I understand the right to vote brings with it the right not to, and if none of the parties have impressed enough to earn a vote then so be it. Part of me still sides with the lesser of two evils approach, but I'd agree that's pretty thin as politics goes. It is sad that not voting seems the only recourse for those who have weighed them up and are left wanting, but it's sadder still that nothing much is being done to reel them back in.

The problem with people absteining from voting is that a Government who few like often gets returned to office. The low turnout at the last election, in 2005, was because many people didn't like Labour or the Tories so they stayed at home. People were saying 'I dont like this lot of the other lot' - so because of them staying at home 'this lot' won again. The solution? Have compulsory voting and people will then vote for the party they dislike least so the party which will end up winning is the one fewest people dislike - which basically means the most popular one wins. It can't be right that only 20% of the voting population vote for a party, which happened with Labour in 2005, and they win.

I dont thi nk people would mind them getting expenses but it doesnt seem they actaully put their hand in their own pocket for very much..... Its morally corrupt if nothing else.. oh, and why should blair bank a fortune(approx?20m) and yet still get ?148k pa pension? Fair enough he is entitled to a pension but surely not a taxpayer funded one having amassed such a fortune...just seems so wrong..

I have always voted since I was 21, and I despair at some people who say that they can't be bothered because they don't like what is going on. These fucking morons have no idea that the only way to change things is to vote the fuckers who have created the current mess the fuck out!
A lot of them still bemoan the fact that the price of their fags and beer have gone up and their dole hasn't! Sun, Mirror and Daily fucking Mail readers no doubt, and I wouldn't lose money on betting on that fact.
The Aussies have never impressed me except for the fact that they have compulsory voting. I served alongside them and learnt a lot about them, before anyone questions my statement.
Makes one wonder what we would get here if the yellow bellied lying thieving bastard two faced up their own arse politicians we have had the guts to incorporate that here!