• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

None of the Above[W:97]

Should we have a choice of "None of the Above"

  • Total voters
    39
  • Poll closed .
Re: None of the Above

Patrickt said:
This year is a great year to consider whether or not ballots should include a "None of the Above" as a choice. If "None of the Above" gets a plurality then the position isn't filled until another election is held.

So, what's your vote for the idea?
Click to expand...
Notice my sig.

It's been there since July.;)
 
Re: None of the Above

Mac-7 said:
This is not a high school popularity contest.

The winner will have tremendous power that will affect everyones lives
Click to expand...

Where did you get the impression that I thought that? The only way you can register disapproval of a candidate and their positions is by not voting for them.

You're suggesting I vote for the lesser of the two evils. My vote for one or the other is tacit approval of them. I do not approve.

And as I said significant disapproval should give any thinking human pause.
 
Re: None of the Above

foadi said:
The guy in yer signature quote disagrees.

"If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for ... but there are certain to be ones you want to vote against. In case of doubt, vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong." Also Time Enough for Love.

None of the above is the ultimate against vote.
Click to expand...

The problem is, as in this case, the OP implies that he doesn't want to vote for either one. A voter doesn't need a "none of the above" to act on that decision.


btw, while I respect Heinlein, I don't agree with everything he puts in his books.
 
Re: None of the Above

Mycroft said:
No.

You are free to choose "none of the above" by not voting.
Click to expand...

Not the same thing. The bane of the corrupt Democrat Party are the deadbeats, junkies and drunks who just don't bother to vote. A "None of the Above" is a specific rejection of the candidates the nitwits have put forward.
 
Re: None of the Above

Patrickt said:
Not the same thing. The bane of the corrupt Democrat Party are the deadbeats, junkies and drunks who just don't bother to vote. A "None of the Above" is a specific rejection of the candidates the nitwits have put forward.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but until a candidate called Mr. None Of The Above gets his name on the ballot by the same process that every other candidate is required to go through, that name doesn't appear.

If you don't like the candidates...don't vote.

Of course, in some States you can write in a name. In that case, you are free to write in None Of The Above if you want.
 
Re: None of the Above

Patrickt said:
This year is a great year to consider whether or not ballots should include a "None of the Above" as a choice. If "None of the Above" gets a plurality then the position isn't filled until another election is held.

So, what's your vote for the idea?
Click to expand...

A vote for none of the above is still a vote for one of the above. Only the most naïve or stubborn could possibly believe differently.
 
Re: None of the Above

Patrickt said:
This year is a great year to consider whether or not ballots should include a "None of the Above" as a choice. If "None of the Above" gets a plurality then the position isn't filled until another election is held.

So, what's your vote for the idea?
Click to expand...

so we'd go 6 months without a president? Hmmm
 
Re: None of the Above

This is the most ridiculous argument. The only way to make it more ridiculous is to throw in a Bieber element.

If you want to vote, then vote FOR a candidate. Vote third party if you want. But saying, "I'm going to do my civic duty and vote, but I'm not going to vote for anybody." That's just a waste of your time and time of the poll workers and a waste of petrol to drive there. If you're just going to go write in Jabba the Hut or None of the Above, you're not doing your civic duty, you're just IN THE EFFING WAY.
 
Re: None of the Above

TurtleDude said:
so we'd go 6 months without a president? Hmmm
Click to expand...

Good point.

That means we would need a Constitutional Amendment to make "none of the above" an option.

Somehow, I don't think the OP realizes just how hard it is to amend the Constitution.
 
Re: None of the Above

Gaius46 said:
Where did you get the impression that I thought that? The only way you can register disapproval of a candidate and their positions is by not voting for them.

You're suggesting I vote for the lesser of the two evils.

My vote for one or the other is tacit approval of them. I do not approve.

And as I said significant disapproval should give any thinking human pause.
Click to expand...

Actually if I could I would urge you to vote for trump because hillay is the most corrupt person to run for president in our lifetime.

Trump has flaws but nothing to compare with hillary

But thats a conservative talking

I dont expect to persuade anyone to do anything here

But I reject the excuse that doing nothing or voting for some 3rd party loser with no chance to win is the honorable thing to do

It isnt.

No rational person can say that trump and hillary are identical or equally bad.
 
Re: None of the Above

Yes we should, but only with the proviso that anyone who was on the ballot already cannot run again. The fact is that "none of the above" would win every election and nobody would ever be elected. I don't know if that's a bad thing or not.
 
Re: None of the Above

Brewdog said:
So, you'll be voting for Gary Johnson, I presume?
Click to expand...

No because Johnson is wrong on several important issues

But even if he were my clone he has no chance to win

Either trump or Hillary will be the next president and I prefer trump
 
Re: None of the Above

Does anyone here vote for party platform regardless of who the candidate is? I couldn't care less who the person is. I vote for policy direction, not personality.
 
Re: None of the Above

Russell797 said:
Does anyone here vote for party platform regardless of who the candidate is? I couldn't care less who the person is. I vote for policy direction, not personality.
Click to expand...

The person does matter.

For example, Trump has been very clear about his policy direction...even when it conflicts with his own party.

On the other hand, Hillary...with her admission that she has "public" positions and "private" positions...isn't clear at all where her policy directions lie. For that matter, you have no assurances that her actual objectives even comply with her party's policy directions.

The result is...the party platform is moot depending on who the winning candidate ends up being.
 
Re: None of the Above

Mycroft said:
The person does matter.

For example, Trump has been very clear about his policy direction...even when it conflicts with his own party.

On the other hand, Hillary...with her admission that she has "public" positions and "private" positions...isn't clear at all where her policy directions lie. For that matter, you have no assurances that her actual objectives even comply with her party's policy directions.

The result is...the party platform is moot depending on who the winning candidate ends up being.
Click to expand...

Trump has his own agenda which seems not to reflect that of the conventional party platform he has been nominated to represent. He has a large following along those lines as the outsider many people have asked for. He's more of a 3rd party candidate. I find Clinton more in line with her party platform and her objectives as well, even if she may have her own strategies regarding how to accomplish those goals.

Trump would have a more difficult time dealing with a Republican dominated Congress than Clinton would with a Democratic dominated Congress. It's easier for a Democrat to vote for Hillary than it is for a Republican to vote for Trump.
 
Re: None of the Above

Russell797 said:
Trump has his own agenda which seems not to reflect that of the conventional party platform he has been nominated to represent. He has a large following along those lines as the outsider many people have asked for. He's more of a 3rd party candidate. I find Clinton more in line with her party platform and her objectives as well, even if she may have her own strategies regarding how to accomplish those goals.

Trump would have a more difficult time dealing with a Republican dominated Congress than Clinton would with a Democratic dominated Congress. It's easier for a Democrat to vote for Hillary than it is for a Republican to vote for Trump.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of Bernie supporters who would disagree with you.
 
Re: None of the Above

Patrickt said:
This year is a great year to consider whether or not ballots should include a "None of the Above" as a choice. If "None of the Above" gets a plurality then the position isn't filled until another election is held.

So, what's your vote for the idea?
Click to expand...

Where do I sign....and do you need a check to make it happen?

If there was EVER a year for none of the above, this is it

I still can't believe that these two are the best the two parties could come up with out of 330 some odd million people

That is a really sad statement on politics in america
 
Re: None of the Above

Patrickt said:
This year is a great year to consider whether or not ballots should include a "None of the Above" as a choice. If "None of the Above" gets a plurality then the position isn't filled until another election is held.

So, what's your vote for the idea?
Click to expand...

No, because this would mean the incumbent president could get a third term.
 
Re: None of the Above

Mycroft said:
There are a lot of Bernie supporters who would disagree with you.
Click to expand...

I voted for Bernie in the primary. We got Clinton who is light years closer to Bernie than is Trump. Anyone who supported Bernie should vote for Hillary to help ensure that Trump can not win.
 
Re: None of the Above

Russell797 said:
I voted for Bernie in the primary. We got Clinton who is light years closer to Bernie than is Trump. Anyone who supported Bernie should vote for Hillary to help ensure that Trump can not win.
Click to expand...

shrug...

That admission by you, in no way, invalidates my remark.
 
Re: None of the Above

Gaea said:
No, because this would mean the incumbent president could get a third term.
Click to expand...

Why would it mean that? If we devised a system with None of the Above we'd have to decide what we want. I'd prefer a system that would force Congress to recover the power they've ceded the president.

If we went 18 months to two years without a president we'd probably be better off than we are now.
 
Re: None of the Above

Patrickt said:
Why would it mean that? If we devised a system with None of the Above we'd have to decide what we want. I'd prefer a system that would force Congress to recover the power they've ceded the president.

If we went 18 months to two years without a president we'd probably be better off than we are now.
Click to expand...

I'd rather end up without a Congress for 18 months to 2 years than without a President. Assuming, of course, that President was interested in just enforcing existing laws.

Obama need not apply.
 
Re: None of the Above

Patrickt said:
Why would it mean that? If we devised a system with None of the Above we'd have to decide what we want. I'd prefer a system that would force Congress to recover the power they've ceded the president.

If we went 18 months to two years without a president we'd probably be better off than we are now.
Click to expand...

The US government could not function without a president. Obama would simply stay in office until a new president was chosen.
 
Re: None of the Above

Patrickt said:
This year is a great year to consider whether or not ballots should include a "None of the Above" as a choice. If "None of the Above" gets a plurality then the position isn't filled until another election is held.

So, what's your vote for the idea?
Click to expand...

No. The American people should have to bear the consequences of their decisions. If you're upset at the nominees get involved in the selection process. Only 28.5% of Americans voted in the Democratic and Republican primaries, and an microscopic amount of Americans involved themselves in the Green, Libertarian, or Constitution Party nominating procedure. None of the above is an option that empowers lazy cynics.
 
Re: None of the Above

Russell797 said:
I voted for Bernie in the primary. We got Clinton who is light years closer to Bernie than is Trump. Anyone who supported Bernie should vote for Hillary to help ensure that Trump can not win.
Click to expand...

Hillary is closer to Bernie when it comes to handing out government freebee's

But on trade and government anti corruption trump is closer to Bernie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom