A Conversation for Ask h2g2
US Election
Just zis Guy, you know? † Cyclist [A690572] :: At the 51st centile of ursine intelligence Posted Nov 10, 2000
I note that people are claiming the high vote for Pat "What Holocaust?" Buchanan in Palm Beach is indicative of some problem with the layout of the ballot paper, but remember that this district only allowed blacks to own property in 1979 and had to be shamed by Doonesbury into repealing an ordinance requiring (black & hispanic) domestics to carry ID cards, so maybe it's not so clear-cut after all.
US Election
FG Posted Nov 10, 2000
That sounds a lot like the members of Congress here. Every year they vote on and pass a pay increase for themselves. (Poor Senator Burns! He only makes $180,000 a year! However can he live on such a paltry sum?) But when it comes to raising the minimum wage to something like a living wage they scream and whine about driving corporate America out of business, because God forbid we cut into the billionaire CEO's salary and prevent him from going on that golfing trip to Hawaii.
I think that voting should be compulsory. Either you vote or you lose your American citizenship. No one, except obviously for the "mentally challenged", is so stupid that they cannot be educated in their duty as a citizen of a democratic republic.
US Election
Fragilis - h2g2 Cured My Tabular Obsession Posted Nov 10, 2000
About voter apathy: One very smart political scientist has been studying voter apathy in America for 30 years. He said that about 50% of our eligible voters actually vote, while the percentage is more like 80% to 90% in other democracies. But interestingly, 85% of *registered* voters do vote.
This indicates that people are interested in voting, but they feel disenfranchised. In other words, they consider the cumbersome process to claim their vote and become convinced that their vote isn't wanted or will be jury-rigged so that it doesn't count for anything. This helps to explain why racial minorities and young people are the least likely to vote, since they feel less appreciated as members of our society.
The solution might be as simple as automatic or easy registration of voters, combined with a series of public messages to the effect that the government really does want everyone to vote. In many other democracies, voter registration is considered the responsibility of the government rather than the voter. Perhaps it should be that way in the US.
As for the ballots, I still feel I don't have enough information to make a decision. I would have to see the ballot in the voting machine with the punch card that was used to really know if it was confusing.
A usability expert famous among computer geeks, Jakob Nielson, has said that he would guess the confusing ballot caused between 5% and 10% of Gore and Buchanan voters to mis-vote. He suggested that voting procedures should be made more uniform nationwide, and that usability experts should be employed when deciding what form this standard should be. I tend to agree that this would save a lot of confusion over close elections like this one.
And finally, about Florida. My mother lives there, and I lived in neighboring Alabama for many years. Racial and religious prejudice is a palpable problem there. And there have been many scandals over voter fraud in the past 10 years. There has never been a scandal about ballots before, though. Usually, it is either racially biased voter intimidation (closing the polls early in black majority districts, telling blacks the county is out of ballots) or pure fraud (convincing homeless people to vote under the names of deceased voters, falsifying absentee ballots).
US Election
Blatherskite the Mugwump - Bandwidth Bandit Posted Nov 10, 2000
Cool your jets, Incognitas. Nobody said anything about establishing IQ standards to vote. Besides, I've known some rather moronic geniuses...
However, I think voter participation would be greatly increased if you actually had to earn the vote. Make it contingent on a high school diploma, and maybe kids would stay in school. Now you have a better educated voting pool, and one that is more interested in using their power because they had to earn it. Roman and Greek democracies had far better participation, because you had to earn citizenship. Immigrants earn their citizenship, and you can't keep them away from the polls if you tried. That still doesn't mean you aren't going to get people who vote for a particular candidate because he has nicer hair, but it'll help.
As for standing up to authority... isn't that what this country is based on? Isn't it the problem here that everyone argues with authority too much? Isn't that one of the key reasons why American tourists make asses of themselves? "You can't do that to me, I'm American!" People know that voting is a right. People know that the polls are supposed to ensure that right. Besides, isn't casting a vote all about speaking out against authority?
And for mandatory participation: I don't think that's necessarily a good idea. Some people can't be bothered to keep up with current affairs and politics. Do you really want them making uninformed choices? There are already enough people who base their vote entirely on the content of their tv commercials. Let's do ourselves a favor and allow them to stay home on Super Tuesdays.
US Election
Asteroid Lil - Offstage Presence Posted Nov 10, 2000
I agree with Fragilis: if voting were compulsory, the citizenry might well pay more attention, if for no other reason thatn to back a candidate who promised to rescind the law of compulsory voting!
As for standing up to authority... I hope that the new generations of gender and ethnicities have your attitude, but those my age and older have some cultural hurdles to jump when it comes to talking back to officials. I even have trouble arguing over a restaurant bill and I would rather take the bus than haggle with a car salesman. This doesn't make me stupid or unworthy of franchise. Rather, it has to do with how girls were raised, once.
US Election
FG Posted Nov 10, 2000
There's a good argument here to be made that those who vote already make plenty of uninformed choices. They just see who gave them the best pat on the pack and solid handshake at the local church and don't see the corporate whore (my favorite phrase of late) behind the plastic smile. So what's the difference of adding a few million more deluded souls to the voting population? We'd probably get much more interesting candidate speeches as they try to pander to the Jerry Springer/WCW/Home Shopping Network audience. Rather than, say, Bob Jones University or the Screen Actors Guild.
US Election
Lear (the Unready) Posted Nov 11, 2000
Those who argue that in a democracy everyone should automatically have the right to vote are confusing equality of opportunity (desirable) with equality of outcome (not desirable, in my opinion). We are very fortunate, in democratic societies, to have the opportunity to learn about and understand the society that we live in, to form critical views of the way it is being governed, to decide who it should be governed by, and even to participate in its governance.
It is not democracy's fault that many people who live in these societies simply cannot be bothered to take advantage of these opportunities, and continue to vote, as said above, on irrelevant factors such as nice hair or charismatic personality. Or, for that matter, simply out of habit or prejudice. An educated electorate would reduce the likelihood of the democratic vote being distorted in this way - surely the idea of some sort of test for competence is at least worth entertaining?
We have such tests for pretty much everything else. No one would consider allowing someone on the roads before passing a driving test, or dispensing medicine before gaining the relevant qualifications. The votes we make have an effect on the society that we live in, and on ourselves and the other people who live in it. Surely it is wise to encourage people to use their power responsibly? As far as I'm concerned, this is a progressive democratic, rather than a conservative, argument...
US Election
Scottworthy Posted Nov 11, 2000
Testing of some kind, or at least requiring some kind of self educating first is something I would very much like to see. I would especially like to see a requirement that everyone read a concise statement by or about each candidate and about each issue they are voting on. They should then answer a few questions about what they just read and only then be allowed to vote on those that they answered correctly (nothing against trying again either). In the US we are not allowed to drop out of school until we are 16. By 16 everyone should know how to read, so you can't say that in doing so we would be discriminating against those who can't read. Since it would be wrong to bias it toward English speakers, having multiple languages would be necessary. Further, in special cases it could be conducted orally. Given this we would have much more educated voters, and hopefully better governments.
Scottworthy
US Election
Still Incognitas, Still Chairthingy, Still lurking, Still invisible, unnoticeable, missable, unseen, just haunting h2g2 Posted Nov 11, 2000
This is ridiculous-having to pass an exam to vote?Everyone who bothers to register deserves a vote.My sister is very intelligent but chooses purposely NOT to vote as a protest against a lousy choice of candidate.She could pass any test or exam about politics and politicians hands down but still would choose not to vote as she regards it as her right not to vote.Now don't all shout at me about her view point as it isn't mine.She would fit any criteria that you have made for making voters work harder for the right to vote but still wouldn't vote.
US Election
Scottworthy Posted Nov 11, 2000
Umm... Maybe I'm misunderstanding Incognitas. I don't see how requiring people to be educated about the thing they are voting on right then is related to their choice not to vote. In fact it is very possible that fewer people would vote if they had to educate themselves. I certainly didn't suggest requiring your sister to vote (quite the opposite if you'll look back a few posts). I just want people to know what they're voting on, rather than just voting down party lines. I'm only talking about the ones who want to vote.
US Election
Still Incognitas, Still Chairthingy, Still lurking, Still invisible, unnoticeable, missable, unseen, just haunting h2g2 Posted Nov 11, 2000
Actually my remarks were made more in Lears direction.I just think that one can't call a country a democracy unless everyone gets the right to vote.
US Election
Lear (the Unready) Posted Nov 11, 2000
I agree Scott, any test for voting should be as open as possible to prevent bias / prejudice against any sections of the electorate. Each individual should be able to present whatever relevant knowledge they have in whatever manner is most appropriate for them. It would certainly be difficult to implement, as well, but then again I imagine people probably used that as an argument against democracy in the first place...
Incognitas - if your sister wants to stay silent that's her business - if she's so disillusioned with the mainstream candidates maybe she should launch some movement of her own, as others have done. I'm talking here about those of us who *would* actually like our views to make a positive difference...
US Election
Lear (the Unready) Posted Nov 11, 2000
Just to add to that :-
Basically I'm making a distinction between the right to vote and the luxury of being able to use that right without needing to have any sense of responsibility about how it is used.
Everyone should have the right to vote in a democratic society. But, as with all other aspects of a society, there needs to be some way of minimising the impact of people who don't care to try to use the system constructively. The luxury of voting for irrelevant reasons is the luxury of a spoilt, complacent society full of lazy individuals with about as much moral intelligence as - er, let's see - George W Bush. Or the other guy, for that matter...
We need to reinvigorate democracy with a sense of value, blahblahblah. Speech over. Actually, I think I'll emigrate to America and run for President myself...
RIGHT TO HAVE RIGHTS PETITION...
Matthew Kershaw Posted Nov 11, 2000
Did you know you do not have exclusivity to your username ?
Did you know others on-site can readily copy ALL the information on your homepage, guide entries and journals ? Indeed, the editors have a facility whereby they actively encourage it.
Someone else can effectively set themselves up as you and go around besmirching your good name if they so desire under the current site policy, and because the site holds copyright over EVERYTHING you have ever posted from approved guide entries, user guide entries, journals, forums, your username to your homepage. You have no substantive grounds to complain…
Did you know if you use some of your ideas developed here off-site you run the risk of being sued for breach of copyright ?
Did you know that the 'non-exclusive' copyright they you may have thought protected your copyright rights, in fact means that no other potential publisher is likely to accept your work because most only accept material which they can have 'exclusive' copyright over ?
So if you wish to some day use some of your ideas generated here you effectively have to think years ahead. Otherwise you might end up like Douglas Adams who has some of his Doctor Who material in a state of limbo because he re-interrupted some of the ideas in later work.
Did you know the editors have the right to sell your material in any form whatsoever ?
The fact is they have to right to use your material in any form they desire. In the terms they have the ability to 'modify' your work. Meaning you could well be misrepresented as a matter of course without an effective method to complain. In fact, the H2G2 copyright holders have the ability to make money off your works long after you are gone.
Did you know the editors reserve the right to change site policy ?
The fact is at any time the editors can effectively ban you by making up whatever rules they so desire to exclude you, you have no recourse whatsoever.
Did you know that homepages, forums and journals are widely available elsewhere on the web absolutely free of charge and without such restrictive copyright clauses ?
The simple fact is that H2G2 operates on the goodwill the works of Douglas Adam's creates. There are many other communities on the web that don't place such all pervasive restrictions upon your work.
Did you know there are many places on the web who value your hard work and creative skills ?
The fact is that if you look hard enough, there are organisations on the web that will pay you for your research and writing skills, even if you fall into the amateur class.
SO, IN SUMMING UP…
Why don't you have any rights ?
Because you were never asked, or included in the process. So they set the criteria solely for there own exclusive benefit.
What's in it for me you may well ask ?
At the moment, kudos of writing for the guide… and stuff you would get elsewhere for nothing anyway.
All is not lost however, you do have some power. The power of numbers.
Please make sure you sign the 'Right to Have Rights Petition over at…
http://www.h2g2.com/A469578
…and see if we can change the guide for the benefit of all.
Thankyou.
M.K*
US Election
Two Bit Trigger Pumping Moron Posted Nov 11, 2000
We don't have a right to vote in America. It is a privilge, and it can be revoked. For instance, felons can't vote.
I think requiring some sort of basic standard for a voting would be a good idea. I think a high school diploma or equivlency would be a good standard (I have a GED). Another possiblity would be to limit it to tax payers. They're the ones paying for the government afterall.
Some states do send out voter information booklets. I was first registered to vote in Oregon. They sent me a packet with statements from the canidates and information about the ballot initatives. This was especially helpful to me since I was in the Army in Korea when I turned 18. I wasn't completely in touch with what was happening in Oregon.
Actually, my dad said the voter informaiton book was kind of cumbersome this year, so he read The League of Women Voters booklet instead.
What we need in this country are educated, interested, and knowledgeable voters. We won't get that by requiring everyone to vote. I think we're far more likely to get it with moderate limitations on the privlege to vote and by providing some basic information to people.
US Election
HappyDude Posted Nov 11, 2000
Question: Why are you still using a voting system imposed by a British King ?
US Election
Blatherskite the Mugwump - Bandwidth Bandit Posted Nov 11, 2000
Funny... I don't recall a British king ordering us to elect a president... in fact, I recall they were rather against the idea of any form of central authority here beyond their own.
US Election
HappyDude Posted Nov 11, 2000
Colonel - check your history books - while I admit that King George III was a little reluctant to grant independance he still made sure that he had a say the system that replaced him.
Key: Complain about this post
US Election
- 61: Just zis Guy, you know? † Cyclist [A690572] :: At the 51st centile of ursine intelligence (Nov 10, 2000)
- 62: FG (Nov 10, 2000)
- 63: Fragilis - h2g2 Cured My Tabular Obsession (Nov 10, 2000)
- 64: Blatherskite the Mugwump - Bandwidth Bandit (Nov 10, 2000)
- 65: Asteroid Lil - Offstage Presence (Nov 10, 2000)
- 66: FG (Nov 10, 2000)
- 67: Scottworthy (Nov 10, 2000)
- 68: Lear (the Unready) (Nov 11, 2000)
- 69: Scottworthy (Nov 11, 2000)
- 70: Still Incognitas, Still Chairthingy, Still lurking, Still invisible, unnoticeable, missable, unseen, just haunting h2g2 (Nov 11, 2000)
- 71: Scottworthy (Nov 11, 2000)
- 72: Still Incognitas, Still Chairthingy, Still lurking, Still invisible, unnoticeable, missable, unseen, just haunting h2g2 (Nov 11, 2000)
- 73: Lear (the Unready) (Nov 11, 2000)
- 74: Lear (the Unready) (Nov 11, 2000)
- 75: Matthew Kershaw (Nov 11, 2000)
- 76: Two Bit Trigger Pumping Moron (Nov 11, 2000)
- 77: HappyDude (Nov 11, 2000)
- 78: Two Bit Trigger Pumping Moron (Nov 11, 2000)
- 79: Blatherskite the Mugwump - Bandwidth Bandit (Nov 11, 2000)
- 80: HappyDude (Nov 11, 2000)
More Conversations for Ask h2g2
Write an Entry
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."