View Single Post
Old 29-04-2010, 11:17   #68
Xaccers
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milling around Milton Keynes
Age: 48
Posts: 12,969
Xaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny stars
Xaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny stars
Re: The 2010 General Election Thread: Week 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris View Post
Another tempting idea, except that the conventional wisdom is that it tends to be Labour voters who are more prone to apathy.

Low turnout is a symptom of voters becoming disengaged with the whole political process. They think they can't change anything, due to a lack of real choice, so therefore why bother. I just don't see how adding a 'none of the above' to the ballot paper is going to change that.

Radical electoral reform, not tinkering around the fringes, is the only way we're likely to get any reversal of that apathy.
Which is why I said abstaining/spoiling is pretty pointless.
Spoiling would only be less pointless if there was a greater turn out and a large proportion spoilt their ballots.

I don't think electoral reform will do it, look at the European elections, they were PR weren't they? Yet the turn out was only 34% compared with 59% (2001) and 61% (2005)
Xaccers is offline