• 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!

Should Someone Be Required By Law To Vote In The Presidential Election(s)?

Should It Be Required That ALL Legal U.S. Citizens Vote In Presidential Elections?

  • Yes

    Votes: 4 6.2%
  • No

    Votes: 60 92.3%
  • Only A Certain Amount Every So Many Years

    Votes: 1 1.5%

  • Total voters
    65

SypherAL

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
374
Reaction score
155
Location
Omaha, NE
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
An interesting debate. Should voting in presidential elections be required by law? Of course this excludes felons and non-u.s. citizens. Legal voting age stays the same in this scenario.

My opinion: If you live in the United States, you will be required to vote in the United States. It would be a huge dis-respect to the millions of Americans that died for this country to sit at home on election day. This is a freedom many have died for so get out and participate!
 
Certainly not, especially if there's no canidate to vote for. This is also America and you have the freedom of choice and that choice includes none of the above. Plus what are they going to do fine you or throw you in jail for not voting? What if you had to work a double shift that day or you were out of state? Forcing people to vote is not freedom either.
 
The constitution gives people the right to vote. Not requiring people to vote. I strongly encourage people to vote, but what about the people who don't care about politics? Would you want someone just blindly voting for whatever name they see first?
 
Nah, I'd rather that uninformed and/or apathetic people NOT vote. It isn't fair for their vote to cancel out the vote of someone who really studied the issues and felt strongly about a candidate or ballot issue. I do, however, support making it easier for people to exercise their right to vote if they want to. Unfortunately, many states are moving in the opposite direction.
 
Certainly not, especially if there's no canidate to vote for. This is also America and you have the freedom of choice and that choice includes none of the above. Plus what are they going to do fine you or throw you in jail for not voting? What if you had to work a double shift that day or you were out of state? Forcing people to vote is not freedom either.

You make a good point. It's not because I agree with him, its because he would be the "best" answer to the limited people available to be president. I am still making a decision to better my country with the limited resources that are available, not voting because I 100% agree with him/her. You shouldn't not vote because you dont agree with someone, you should vote because 1 of the 2 people available to be president would do a better job in your own personal opinion. Sometimes you vote based on damage control.
 
Last edited:
An interesting debate. Should voting in presidential elections be required by law? Of course this excludes felons and non-u.s. citizens. Legal voting age stays the same in this scenario.

My opinion: If you live in the United States, you will be required to vote in the United States. It would be a huge dis-respect to the millions of Americans that died for this country to sit at home on election day. This is a freedom many have died for so get out and participate!
They died so that we could have freedom, and yes that includes the freedom to choose whether or not to participate in elections. Not to mention if you have to legally force someone to vote, they're probably ill-informed and/or entirely disinterested in politics, we need more intelligent voters, not necessarily more voters in a numerical sense.
 
I should add that I consider myself very informed and politically involved...and yet I don't always vote myself. When I do, it's certainly not because I expect to influence the outcome of the election. In terms of the cost/benefit to me personally, it's usually just not worth the effort to vote. It wastes at least 30 minutes of my time, and the chances that my single vote swings the election are roughly nil.

And before I get the inevitable followup question, I'd like to point out that "What if everyone thought this way?" is a logical fallacy. It's based on the incorrect premise that if one person changes their behavior, that everyone else will too. ;)
 
Last edited:
I should add that I consider myself very informed and politically involved...and yet I don't always vote myself. When I do, it's certainly not because I expect to influence the outcome of the election. In terms of the cost/benefit to me personally, it's usually just not worth the effort to vote. It wastes at least 30 minutes of my time, and the chances that my single vote swings the election are roughly nil.

And before I get the inevitable followup question, I'd like to point out that "What if everyone thought this way?" is a logical fallacy. It's based on the incorrect premise that if one person changes their behavior, that everyone else will too. ;)

If you are informed it is your duty as an American to vote, sorry if its a bit inconvenient.
 
You make a good point. It's not because I agree with him, its because he would be the "best" answer to the limited people available to be president. I am still making a decision to better my country with the limited resources that are available, not voting because I 100% agree with him/her. You shouldn't not vote because you dont agree with someone, you should vote because 1 of the 2 people available to be president would do a better job in your own personal opinion. Sometimes you vote based on damage control.

Yes but just because you voted for someone doesnt mean you bettered the country. Politicians promise alot during campaigns and often do very little of what they said. No I dont have to agree 100% with a canidate and his choices but they better have certain things in place and better have not crossed certain lines. If they've crossed lines where I feel I don't want to vote for them and then the other canidate just sucks, I don't feel I should be forced to vote.

Infact if you vote a dishonest politician into office and they continue their same practices that screw up the country you are infact partly to blame for the mess because you voted that person in knowing his flaws. People who didnt vote atleast dont have to bear that responsibility.
 
An interesting debate. Should voting in presidential elections be required by law? Of course this excludes felons and non-u.s. citizens. Legal voting age stays the same in this scenario.

My opinion: If you live in the United States, you will be required to vote in the United States. It would be a huge dis-respect to the millions of Americans that died for this country to sit at home on election day. This is a freedom many have died for so get out and participate!

I'm all about freedom of choice...and accepting the "personal" responsibility that goes along with your choices. You have the right to choose to vote and you have no one but yourself to blame if you don't vote...and don't like the way things turned out.

But I am also offended and somewhat disgusted and pissed with your attempt to tug at my emotions to shame me if I choose not to vote. Intimating that I would have a "huge dis-respect to the millions of Americans that died for this country" seems to me to be a very...liberal...thing to do. I would rather you make your decision and leave me alone to make my decision.
 
An interesting debate. Should voting in presidential elections be required by law? Of course this excludes felons and non-u.s. citizens. Legal voting age stays the same in this scenario.

My opinion: If you live in the United States, you will be required to vote in the United States. It would be a huge dis-respect to the millions of Americans that died for this country to sit at home on election day. This is a freedom many have died for so get out and participate!

Considering how little the popular vote really matters in this country, no, I don't think voting should be required.
 
I'm all about freedom of choice...and accepting the "personal" responsibility that goes along with your choices. You have the right to choose to vote and you have no one but yourself to blame if you don't vote...and don't like the way things turned out.

But I am also offended and somewhat disgusted and pissed with your attempt to tug at my emotions to shame me if I choose not to vote. Intimating that I would have a "huge dis-respect to the millions of Americans that died for this country" seems to me to be a very...liberal...thing to do. I would rather you make your decision and leave me alone to make my decision.

I was not "tugging" at your emotions, I was stating my belief. I am not a presidential candidate, I dont tug at emotions. This is a poll, not a post to influence my beliefs. I was waiting for someone to use my lean label as an insult to their intelligence. My view has absolutely nothing to do with my political stance. This is a debate about being required to vote. For some reason i feel if my lean said "conservative" you wouldn't be so offended. If you get offended so easily on a political DEBATE forum you may want to consider spending your free time doing something else.
 
Last edited:
Yes but just because you voted for someone doesnt mean you bettered the country. Politicians promise alot during campaigns and often do very little of what they said. No I dont have to agree 100% with a canidate and his choices but they better have certain things in place and better have not crossed certain lines. If they've crossed lines where I feel I don't want to vote for them and then the other canidate just sucks, I don't feel I should be forced to vote.

Infact if you vote a dishonest politician into office and they continue their same practices that screw up the country you are infact partly to blame for the mess because you voted that person in knowing his flaws. People who didnt vote atleast dont have to bear that responsibility.

Every politician promises things he cant deliver, it's always been like that. Nothing a politician says can guarantee anyone anything, sometimes you just need to take a risk and hope the 1 out of the 10 presidents we elect is worth the vote. I do understand what your saying, I just dont agree. I myself could never see myself allowing my voice not to be heard regardless if I agreed with the candidates views of whomever was running, I would always vote for whoever I thought would benefit America the most ....or the lesser of the two evils....if that makes any sense. I respect your opinion though.
 
Last edited:
An interesting debate. Should voting in presidential elections be required by law? Of course this excludes felons and non-u.s. citizens. Legal voting age stays the same in this scenario.

The problem is not people refusing to participate in elections. The problem is people who are politically illiterate voting.What do I mean by politically illiterate? These are people who don't really pay attention to politics.They don't research candidates and practically just blindly vote for a candidate. Usually these people vote once every four years and maybe even in mid-term elections. They would rather watch American idol or some other dumb ass show instead of spending a few minutes to pay attention to what our elected officials are doing.This why there is an extremely low approval rating of our elected officials and a high incumbent reelection rate.The last thing we need is more politically naive people being forced by the law to participate in elections they do not want to participate. Forcing people who would not have even bothered to register to vote in the first to go vote would make this much worse.


My opinion: If you live in the United States, you will be required to vote in the United States. It would be a huge dis-respect to the millions of Americans that died for this country to sit at home on election day. This is a freedom many have died for so get out and participate!

You are aware that right is implied that you have a choice in whether or not you want to exercise it? Its the bill of rights not the bill of mandates.
 
Last edited:
The problem is not people refusing to participate in elections. The problem is people who are politically illiterate voting.What do I mean by politically illiterate? These are people who don't really pay attention to politics.They don't research candidates and practically just blindly vote for a candidate. Usually these people vote once every four years and maybe even in mid-term elections. They would rather watch American idol or some other dumb ass show instead of spending a few minutes to pay attention to what our elected officials are doing.This why there is an extremely low approval rating of our elected officials and a high incumbent reelection rate.The last thing we need is more politically naive people being forced by the law to participate in elections they do not want to participate. Forcing people who would not have even bothered to register to vote in the first to go vote would make this much worse.




You are aware that right is implied that you have a choice in whether or not you want to exercise it? Its the bill of rights not the bill of mandates.


Yes, i understand what your saying. By American's dying for our country they would be dying for our freedoms, so giving someone the freedom to vote would fall under that category. Beliefs like this is what America was founded on. However, I do believe greater respect could be paid to such hero's by participating in elections on a regular basis, voting is a good thing, but choosing not to vote is your right as a United States citizen. So many people could influence elections if they simply went out and voted. Republican or Democrat, I don't care, lets have an honest election. Many people neglect voting as an inconvenience, however, I am proud to vote on election day, some people around the world would do anything to participate in a free election.
 
Last edited:
I was not "tugging" at your emotions, I was stating my belief. I am not a presidential candidate, I dont tug at emotions. This is a poll, not a post to influence my beliefs. I was waiting for someone to use my lean label as an insult to their intelligence. My view has absolutely nothing to do with my political stance. This is a debate about being required to vote. For some reason i feel if my lean said "conservative" you wouldn't be so offended. If you get offended so easily on a political DEBATE forum you may want to consider spending your free time doing something else.

That's BS.

You tried to lay a guilt trip as your reasoning for why people should be required to vote.

You framed this as a "think about the people who died for you" thing and want to use that to justify a law forcing people to vote. This is a typical liberal tactic.

Think about the children and pass a law to do X.

Think about what second hand smoke does and pass a law to do X.

Think about global warming and pass a law to do X.

Give me a freaking break!
 
Last edited:
An interesting debate. Should voting in presidential elections be required by law? Of course this excludes felons and non-u.s. citizens. Legal voting age stays the same in this scenario.

My opinion: If you live in the United States, you will be required to vote in the United States. It would be a huge dis-respect to the millions of Americans that died for this country to sit at home on election day. This is a freedom many have died for so get out and participate!

There is no disrespect to those who died for the US or who served and are still alive. The right to vote has been preserved over time, nevertheless, "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" as expressed in the Declaration of Independence trumps any idea of forcing someone to vote in any election.
 
Nah, I'd rather that uninformed and/or apathetic people NOT vote. It isn't fair for their vote to cancel out the vote of someone who really studied the issues and felt strongly about a candidate or ballot issue

precisely. in this discussion, our current system's problem is that it does not filter enough for precisely that - which is why I support bringing back a basic poll test. Simple stuff based on the Citizenship exam like "what are the three branches of government" and/or "without looking - who are you voting for".
 
Absolutely not. There are already too many people voting, who are severely underinformed, as it stands now.
 
Yes, i understand what your saying. By American's dying for our country they would be dying for our freedoms, so giving someone the freedom to vote would fall under that category

what an unusual view of the concept of "freedom". So "freedom" for you means "coercion to make you do what I want you to do".


...this explains so much that I have not hitherto understood about the leftist viewpoint in America....
 
what an unusual view of the concept of "freedom". So "freedom" for you means "coercion to make you do what I want you to do".


...this explains so much that I have not hitherto understood about the leftist viewpoint in America....

That's not what I said, I have no idea how you could have possibly interpreted my statement that way. You are using my lean title to put fake thoughts into your mind. You probably haven't interpreted the left wing view properly because your vision is clouded with reasons to hate liberal beliefs regardless if they match your own beliefs at times.

What is your definition of freedom? How many definitions could there be? Please Mr. smart conservative, explain to me what freedom is. Allowing the rich to prosper while the poor suffer? Using the bible as the document to run America? Deportation of all immigrants? Telling women what medications they can and cant take? Using a "your on your own" mentality when it comes to healthcare for the elderly? Ending unemployment benefits and food stamps for people in need? Cutting spending while not investing? Treating America's economy like its family of 4's family budget? If these are your definitions of freedom I must say you have a rather interesting view on America.
 
Last edited:
i voted no. as much as i would like to see turnout increase, we can't overcome apathy with legislation in this area. it's up to the individual to educate him or herself on the issues and to choose accordingly. one of those choices is whether or not to vote.
 
That's BS.

You tried to lay a guilt trip as your reasoning for why people should be required to vote.

You framed this as a "think about the people who died for you" thing and want to use that to justify a law forcing people to vote. This is a typical liberal tactic.

Think about the children and pass a law to do X.

Think about what second hand smoke does and pass a law to do X.

Think about global warming and pass a law to do X.

Give me a freaking break!


Somehow you brought global warming, second hand smoke, and chilidren into a debate about voting requirements. Once again, you are using feelings instead of facts to vent your frustrations. This is a debate forum, if your not able to handle reading other peoples opinions and views on political issues and beliefs I would strongly consider not participating on this forum. As an educator, I would assume you would understand something like this.
 
Last edited:
I should not be made to vote, particularly if I don't support the process or available candidates. If, for example, there were a campaign between Maxine Waters and Rick Santorum I would feel dishonest and shamed if I voted for either one of them...and if there isn't a 3rd party candidate I can support why should I then be forced into voting?

I appreciate having the right to vote, but legally obligating me to vote takes it too far, IMO.
 
Back
Top Bottom