It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mandatory voting? Obama says it would be 'transformative'

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 04:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

That kind of blathering portrayed day in and day out by the MSM only works on the weak minded and uninformed. It's like a jedi mind trick... it only works on the weak minded.




posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 04:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: Spider879

Don't we have the collective knowledge to overcome the problem of third world countries? Can't we build for each other homes? Can't we grow food for one another? Can we not come together and provide a quality of life for each other?


The only thing that stands in the way of that becoming reality in a country such as ours is the mindset of, "What can one do for me?"


Not while there is a mindset that will tell you the above is collectivist B/S that reeks of socialism.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 04:29 AM
link   
a reply to: EternalSolace

Thats fine however "educated" and "educate" in this context is another left tag word for having the mind right, being fully indoctrinated ect.

Folks complain about partisanism but thats all voting is. How can that be educated out of the voting process without looking like 1984 or something? If the left actually believe that a proper decision could be made by exposure to all input then they wouldn't be about churning out left indoctrinated numb skulls at most major universities in the US.


edit on 19-3-2015 by Logarock because: n



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 04:37 AM
link   
It would set a terrible precedent.
If the government can force citizens to vote, what will they force them to do next?

As far as the idea that it would reduce the amount of money spent on campaigns.....
More voters to sway equals less money spent???????
How the hell does that make any sense?
The guy that said it is running the Executive branch of our government. That is scary.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 04:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: coldkidc
"...universal voting would "counteract money more than anything.""


So...uhm...I am having a serious hard time no laughing in anger. This is a ridiculous statement by a ridiculous person (obviously not the Op). He is already going to the UN to get the to govern US policy for example, on personal gun ownership, matters of racial violence like in Feurguson MO and other things. SOOooo why not let the world in on the national electorate with out opt out choice. Might as well mark the beast.

Whatever.....I call BS



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 04:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: skunkape23
I vote "kiss my ass."


I'm with you!!!



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 05:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
It would set a terrible precedent.
If the government can force citizens to vote, what will they force them to do next?

As far as the idea that it would reduce the amount of money spent on campaigns.....
More voters to sway equals less money spent???????
How the hell does that make any sense?
The guy that said it is running the Executive branch of our government. That is scary.

They can force you to pay your taxes force to join the military if they need you bad enough..like the draft, even imminent domain , if this is a sin then this one I am willing to let them have.
In ancient times the Athenians made it a crime for a citizen to avoid political controversy, this in my view would fall under apathy today.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 05:04 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

He very well knows millions annually come free to Democrat politicians by union dues in exchange for strong advocacy...for many DECADES.

And that never gets mentioned in these Q&As.

Scott Walker has exposed this in Wisconsin and won victory's on "worker rights" allowing say where your union dues are spent.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 05:24 AM
link   
I honestly do not think mandatory voting to be a bad idea - but before such a law is passed, it is very important to discover and understand why people aren't voting in the first place.

I personally consider any voter turnout rate less than 100% to be a failure of the democratic process on some level, whether the process of voting made too difficult for some or not accessible enough to others. Part of the blame also befalls the apathetic voters who make endless excuses as to why they don't vote: I don't like the candidates; I'm too busy; my vote doesn't matter; I don't want to; etc., etc., etc...

Since reaching voting age I have always participated in every single election I've been eligible to vote on - municipal, provincial, and federal. I do basic research on the candidates, their party platform and their stance on the issues most important to me within their sphere of influence. I do this eagerly and without exception because their actions and decisions will have an effect on my life in some manner.

So I simply don't get it when I hear of others eschewing this fundamental democratic right for what I consider to be selfish and nonsensical reasons, especially considering there is a significant chunk of the human population who cannot vote at all. I remember when the biggest news was how Taliban officials where cutting off the ink-dabbed fingers of Afghani's voting for the first time, and how the threat of such wasn't stopping thousands of others of voting in the first democratic election since the end of Taliban rule.

There are people willing to face dismemberment, torture and even death in other countries for the opportunity to vote... and yet there are those in our countries who do not simply because they are lazy or don't care.

Maybe instead of mandatory voting a system of reward and benefit could be created for those that do vote. Perhaps a tax credit of sorts?



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 05:32 AM
link   
a reply to: coldkidc

I would support making election day a national holiday so people can vote. As for change, electing individuals who represent the people instead of business is the key.







posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 06:00 AM
link   
The principle itself that everyone should vote and have an interest in how the country is run is very good.

How it works in reality is a completely different issue - Most people won't use it as a way to educate themselves on policies and differences between the candidates etc, and we'll simply have lots of uneducated and random voting.

Australia have something similar don't they? I've worked with a few Aussies and they had to post their votes home to avoid prosecution or something.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 06:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
Kind of defeats the idea of democracy. You live in a free democracy, but you must vote. Surely the freedom not to vote is just as important


^^ Exactly. To require a person to vote is the exact opposite of a free republic with a democratic voting system. it is also highly suspect that he invites millions of illegals in, amnesty gets discussion, and then he talks about mandatory voting. There is a strong sewer smell coming from all that.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 06:15 AM
link   
We have it here in Oz and my experience is that it only increases the number of parties on ballot sheet but the result is always labour or liberal and a minor party getting is such as democrats or greens to hold balance of power. I think this summation of Gov is quiet accurate




posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 06:15 AM
link   
If it was ever made into law, you'd have to have a 3rd box for "None of the Above".

They couldn't force someone to vote from just a couple of candidates.

Having the majority of votes as "None of the Above" would send a louder message from the population than simply having half the country not vote.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 06:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Capitalsource

That would be good, as we can be sure your displeasure is registered and not on the couch eating leftover stale pizza and beer.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:05 AM
link   
The Dictator has spoken.

All you people who use your right to not vote because you don't like a two Party system will be in the ghulags.

Some people don't vote for religious reasons, well Obama metaphorically says off with your heads infidels.



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:13 AM
link   
a reply to: coldkidc

Voting should be mandatory. To those people who wine and moan about "I don't want to vote for any of them" well you can still vote and not vote for any of them. If you are too stupid to work out how, then , quite frankly, you are too stupid to have the vote in the first place !!!



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: yorkshirelad
a reply to: coldkidc

Voting should be mandatory. To those people who wine and moan about "I don't want to vote for any of them" well you can still vote and not vote for any of them. If you are too stupid to work out how, then , quite frankly, you are too stupid to have the vote in the first place !!!


So if I don't vote I would instantly become a criminal stripping me of all my rights.
Thank you mr brown shirt for wishing to goose step across America, seig heil!!!



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:23 AM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

I don't see why, people should complain about the fact that YOU - TinfoilTP - didn't cast a vote ...



posted on Mar, 19 2015 @ 08:28 AM
link   
It disgusts me that our government is making more and more things mandatory, and our blind zombie populace keeps supporting it and thinking it's a good idea.

What the hell happened to the principles of freedom and independence? The founding fathers must be spinning in their graves.
edit on 3/19/15 by peskyhumans because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join