Get fit, quit smoking, or take up a new hobby? Why spoiling your ballot in this year’s upcoming election is the most important New Year’s resolution you can make…
Denis: 1) as it says in the article, spoiled ballots are counted and the numbers are recorded and made public. 2) I am NOT saying it will happen, but hundreds of thousands of voters deciding "NONE OF THE ABOVE" would be effective and send a very clear "we are fed up" message.
Phil: Hundreds of thousands of voters saying " none of the above" --- meaning "we refuse to endorse the results of this undemocratic pantomine under FPTP" ---- would , I think, make a difference.
if people do spoil their ballot there is no way of telling if they did it by accident, in support of electoral reform, or for any number of other reasons. And it is totally ignorable - just like it is possible to ignore the millions of people who don't even go to the polling station.
No one notices the spoilt ballots. Much better to vote for whichever candidate is most likely to help deliver PR. Lib Dems, Green - even Reform - are committed to electoral reform, as are some Labour and even one or two Tory MPs.
Interesting piece, and I agree that a move to PR would be a fairer representation of public opinion (although - this could also perpetuate some more extremist positions). However, I do not see how ballot spoiling will progress a move to PR. You say that there are only two parties that can feasibly win, which limits the voting options; if you are going to therefore 'waste' your vote by spoiling it, doesn't it send a stronger message by voting for an independent or smaller party that, whilst may not be a winner, your vote will better convey your viewpoint?
NOT if that vote is construed as tacit support for the system. Written abstention - a protest - would however need mass support to undermine the system's legitimacy.
Indeed. Surely a high risk strategy unless there is a large enough movement? And if said movement is large enough, then would that not be better placed towards an independent candidate / party which can then potentially enact policy if support is large enough?
Denis: 1) as it says in the article, spoiled ballots are counted and the numbers are recorded and made public. 2) I am NOT saying it will happen, but hundreds of thousands of voters deciding "NONE OF THE ABOVE" would be effective and send a very clear "we are fed up" message.
voting for a candidate who supports electoral reform makes a difference in a few marginal seats. spoiling your ballot makes a difference nowhere.
Phil: Hundreds of thousands of voters saying " none of the above" --- meaning "we refuse to endorse the results of this undemocratic pantomine under FPTP" ---- would , I think, make a difference.
if people do spoil their ballot there is no way of telling if they did it by accident, in support of electoral reform, or for any number of other reasons. And it is totally ignorable - just like it is possible to ignore the millions of people who don't even go to the polling station.
No one notices the spoilt ballots. Much better to vote for whichever candidate is most likely to help deliver PR. Lib Dems, Green - even Reform - are committed to electoral reform, as are some Labour and even one or two Tory MPs.
Challenging - I like the idea one can exercise your ballot without having to endorse anyone. Better than staying home, for sure.
Interesting piece, and I agree that a move to PR would be a fairer representation of public opinion (although - this could also perpetuate some more extremist positions). However, I do not see how ballot spoiling will progress a move to PR. You say that there are only two parties that can feasibly win, which limits the voting options; if you are going to therefore 'waste' your vote by spoiling it, doesn't it send a stronger message by voting for an independent or smaller party that, whilst may not be a winner, your vote will better convey your viewpoint?
NOT if that vote is construed as tacit support for the system. Written abstention - a protest - would however need mass support to undermine the system's legitimacy.
Indeed. Surely a high risk strategy unless there is a large enough movement? And if said movement is large enough, then would that not be better placed towards an independent candidate / party which can then potentially enact policy if support is large enough?
Who is there genuinely that the disparate strands can gather round?
No party MJB.