This and a similar result in last years UK election is why we need to go the Australian route and make voting compulsory.
The UK government won a landslide with just 15% of the electorate actually voting for a Labour MP. But because we have a broken system they have a huge majority.
Australian voting isn’t just mandatory. It’s a two-party preferential system. If you vote for a minor party or independent, your vote ultimately goes toward one of the two largest parties. No vote is a throwaway.
Two party systems are as dangerous as voting Labour. Fortunately thanks to Labours disastrous term so far we now have three viable parties theoretically capable of winning the next election. Which is coming sooner than people realise. Probably 2026, possibly this year.
While I agree in principle I don’t think that would necessarily change the results in this case as labour was the best mainstream option in that case. The conservatives had messed up badly and lost public confidence, bleeding votes to both Labour and Reform.
Labour are NEVER an option. We don’t need their hard left Orwellian hell state they are creating. It was all there for people to see during the election. But every voice that warned they were lying about almost everything in their manifesto (mine included) were silenced by being slapped with the “far-right” label. A label that Labour use to describe ANY criticism aimed at them. Why? Because it sounds scary, it works and keeps people scared of change.
You think that Labour are hard left? They literally kicked out all the actual communists and other far left people years ago. I don’t think you have ever seen what real far-left organizations look like or believe - I actually used to be a member of one some time ago if you wanted to ask. You’re either misinformed or a lot further right than you claim. It doesn’t surprise me people are applying that label to you given what you have just come out with.
I believe that people that do not want to vote or do not feel particularly strongly about politics should be free to stay home. They might not know much about politics. Wouldn’t you rather have people vote who are actually invested into politics and come to vote because they actually want to? Also, I do not think it is ok to force people to participate in democracy in suvh a manner.
Just because you reckon your party would have won if you forced people to vote, does not mean it should be done.
It’s true that mandatory voting nets a lot of low information voters. It also encourages a lot of people to check the major party’s policies who otherwise wouldn’t bother.
I’m not aware of low information voters swaying the vote one way or another.
By making voting mandatory, it becomes mandatory for everyone to have an opportunity to vote.
In what country do people not have the opportunity to vote? Even if that is the case, why not just make the voting accessible without forcing people to vote?
It seems to me that there is a difference between telling someone to take and interest and forcing them to vote even though they do not care to do that on their own.
This and a similar result in last years UK election is why we need to go the Australian route and make voting compulsory.
The UK government won a landslide with just 15% of the electorate actually voting for a Labour MP. But because we have a broken system they have a huge majority.
Australian voting isn’t just mandatory. It’s a two-party preferential system. If you vote for a minor party or independent, your vote ultimately goes toward one of the two largest parties. No vote is a throwaway.
Two party systems are as dangerous as voting Labour. Fortunately thanks to Labours disastrous term so far we now have three viable parties theoretically capable of winning the next election. Which is coming sooner than people realise. Probably 2026, possibly this year.
Two party preferential is not the same as two party.
A lot of elected reps needed preferences from other candidates in order to make 50% of the vote. Those reps know where their bread us buttered.
You are talking shit.
While I agree in principle I don’t think that would necessarily change the results in this case as labour was the best mainstream option in that case. The conservatives had messed up badly and lost public confidence, bleeding votes to both Labour and Reform.
Labour are NEVER an option. We don’t need their hard left Orwellian hell state they are creating. It was all there for people to see during the election. But every voice that warned they were lying about almost everything in their manifesto (mine included) were silenced by being slapped with the “far-right” label. A label that Labour use to describe ANY criticism aimed at them. Why? Because it sounds scary, it works and keeps people scared of change.
You think that Labour are hard left? They literally kicked out all the actual communists and other far left people years ago. I don’t think you have ever seen what real far-left organizations look like or believe - I actually used to be a member of one some time ago if you wanted to ask. You’re either misinformed or a lot further right than you claim. It doesn’t surprise me people are applying that label to you given what you have just come out with.
I believe that people that do not want to vote or do not feel particularly strongly about politics should be free to stay home. They might not know much about politics. Wouldn’t you rather have people vote who are actually invested into politics and come to vote because they actually want to? Also, I do not think it is ok to force people to participate in democracy in suvh a manner.
Just because you reckon your party would have won if you forced people to vote, does not mean it should be done.
It’s true that mandatory voting nets a lot of low information voters. It also encourages a lot of people to check the major party’s policies who otherwise wouldn’t bother.
I’m not aware of low information voters swaying the vote one way or another.
By making voting mandatory, it becomes mandatory for everyone to have an opportunity to vote.
In what country do people not have the opportunity to vote? Even if that is the case, why not just make the voting accessible without forcing people to vote?
I just don’t see the point.
You don’t see the point in telling citizens to take an interest?
Ok mate.
It seems to me that there is a difference between telling someone to take and interest and forcing them to vote even though they do not care to do that on their own.