• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

What if voting had personal direct consequences?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Necronomikon

Member
Dec 9, 2008
726
0
750
San Salvador, El Salvador
Hey GAF, I was thinking about US current situation and the political circus that has been going on (not making fun about that fact since my country is indeed much worse) and its almost about to end and all the possible consequences of the next US president.

Anyhow... Imagine this possible scenario: they keep a record of who you voted and "rooted" for, so if your selected candidate wins, you are directly impacted by your candidates choices while the others could subjectively argue those choices while presenting some logical argument. For instance and hypothetically speaking, if war was declared against anyone, you as a proved voter would automatically be enrolled to enlist, while others none voters (voted for another candidate) could hypothetically appeal not to enlist since they weren't supporters of that candidate. Of course boundaries about this automatic rule would have to be created in order to prevail justice/equality of some sort, when dealing with economic situations.

Would you be on board with some system like this?

Personally, I think something like this would make voters more aware and conscious about the decision they're about to take and the possible consequences it could pertain. I would like something like that to some degree in order to demand responsibility for the choices each takes.

What do you think GAF?
 

Chase17

Member
Jun 4, 2014
11,419
0
0
I don't know how this could feasibly be implemented, and even if it could it isn't a good idea (less people would vote, how do you determine what does and doesn't warrant consequences, even worse of a divide amongst society etc)
 

ant_

not characteristic of ants at all
Jan 11, 2009
5,455
20
1,165
Southern California
I think the system you proposed is wrong. A lot of policies enacted in social welfare require the participation of everyone. If universal healthcare ever became a thing, those who voted against it wouldn't have to pay-in?

Regardless of the solution proposed, there are better ways for us to encourage voting. Step 1 is to make it easier.
 

Hazmat

Member
Sep 5, 2005
6,766
0
0
That's an awful idea. The President is the President of the entire country, not just the people that voted for her.
 

jchap

Member
Jun 12, 2010
5,253
10
785
Under your system people voting conservative wouldn't have to pay higher tax rates because they didn't vote for them!
 

norm9

Member
Nov 21, 2014
11,964
160
540
I'd prefer a point system for voting. You get a point for every election you participate in. After 6 elections or whatever number statisticians deem a good enough number, your next vote could be worth 1.3 to 1.4 votes to the usual 1.0. Alternatively, you could get a free Big Mac meal or something. Regular size of course.
 

SunnyVi

Member
Aug 12, 2016
39
0
0
Wouldn't presidential candidates lie/hide their positions even more? In the example you've provided why would someone say they were for war? They would end up getting far fewer votes because people would be afraid to vote for them.
 

Stead Fast

Banned
Jun 24, 2016
2,051
0
0
In no way would your hypothesis improve the voting system, I'm afraid OP. What is more, based on the thread title, I came in simply to say tht voting already does have personal direct consequences, at least for some people.

Taking a political stance alone can alienate you from a lot of friends and family, as someone whose been looked down upon by said people for my own.

I can understand the sentiment you want to get across, that ignorant voting can help to damage a nation politically, but it's not the people who ultimately need to be punished for electing a bad offical, it's the offical (who put themselves forwards to the vote to begin with) for abusing their position. Presidency is a service from by point of view, not a privilage.
 

tokkun

Member
Jan 29, 2007
16,092
0
0
Madison, WI
I guess I'll vote for this guy then

 

NeoGold123

Member
Mar 22, 2015
693
0
0
I think this is a bad idea. There is already enough of a divide with it being an anonymous vote, putting your name on a list would be like autocompleting a hit list for the "other side".

That's an awful idea. The President is the President of the entire country, not just the people that voted for her.

That's the one I hate hearing the most. "Well he's not MY President." Yes, yes he is. You live in America, this is the American President, he is your president.
 

duckroll

Member
Jun 7, 2004
114,734
5
0
39
Imagine this possible scenario: they keep a record of who you voted and when the other candidate wins your name along with a list of all the other people who voted for the other candidate is handed over to the Secret Police as a watch list.
 

Cymbal Head

Banned
Nov 4, 2005
4,405
0
0
I'd prefer a point system for voting. You get a point for every election you participate in. After 6 elections or whatever number statisticians deem a good enough number, your next vote could be worth 1.3 to 1.4 votes to the usual 1.0. Alternatively, you could get a free Big Mac meal or something. Regular size of course.

Old people already have more than enough political influence without their vote counting twice as much as mine. I could go for that big mac though.

OP, your idea would be a bureaucratic nightmare. Imagine all the policies people would be opting into and out of over a lifetime. What happens when a president I voted for makes a change in a policy from the one I opted out of? Could he draft me even if I opposed the president who started the war in the first place? Policies don't exist in a vacuum.

Plus all the other reasons it's bad.
 

7DollarHagane

Banned
Oct 18, 2013
11,436
4
0
Imagine this possible scenario: they keep a record of who you voted and when the other candidate wins your name along with a list of all the other people who voted for the other candidate is handed over to the Secret Police as a watch list.

And then when you vote you agree to let the government track all your DNS activity too so they can know if you actually agree with your vote.
 

Qurupeke

Member
May 27, 2012
13,399
0
0
Greece
Great idea. Why stop there though? Let these consequences be exile, the country doesn't need those who didn't support the Great Leader.
 

JeTmAn81

Member
Jul 3, 2008
9,926
167
1,210
We need more voting, not less. If anything the should be more incentives to just vote.
 

Guileless

Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
Jun 7, 2004
10,450
2,004
1,925
Memphis
The GAF brigade, mustered from those with an Obama "HOPE" avatar in 2008, served honorably in Libya hunting down Qaddafi. Press X to pay respects.
 

RainForce

Banned
Sep 19, 2016
573
0
0
This is something I'd expect out of a "twisted games" scenario like Saw or Danganronpa, not a modern democracy.
 
Apr 7, 2014
5,918
0
0
I really see no need for personal responsibility for the voters in a representative democracy. How is the trickle down of their incompetence and the taxes that they impose not enough of a punishment for giving OTHERS power? Maybe keep this in the realm of fiction.
 
May 13, 2008
40,275
1
0
Markham, Toronto
What if...we treated voting like an actual right instead of how one political party currently treats it as a privilege and tries to punish and disenfranchise people?

Or we can continue to make these ever increasingly oppressive dystopian type solutions.
 

Slo

Member
Jun 7, 2004
22,360
0
1,345
I imagine this would end up a lot like the North Korean version of democracy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.