ANyone have any realistic ideas on how to increase voter turnout

[DAVOUT]

Forget the voters; they are not really interested in voting, and they are so difficult to count!

And make a random draw with the candidates names.

[MrBaggins]

1) Remove the exits on the voting stations, so you can enter but not leave, and set up a positive pressure ventilation system.
2) When the end of the regular voting period has drawn near, employ a nerve agent with a limited active duration, over residential neighborhoods.
3) Keep the voters til its safe to leave, and then send them home with some antidote just in case
4) Employ some extra santitation workers to clean up the bodies... some of those probably won't have voted.

[Nubclear]

Pardon me if anyone else has suggested this:

Next election, anyone that hasn't voted gets their children killed. If they have no children, then they die.

Within three election cycles, everyone WILL be voting.

[Kyle]

and the minor parties can't win diddly

....

There's good reason for that.



Either give people the day off for election day (making it a holiday) or move the day to the weekend. The first one would be easier, no pesky constitution to change.

[Q Classic]

for every vote they cast, promise an orgasm.

[Imran Siddiqui]

for every vote they cast, promise an orgasm.

Hookers in the booth? Or election tables in the strip clubs?

[Oerdin]

Hmm, a blow job for every ballot? This might encourage voter fraud as youngsters try to vote more then once.

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
Make it mandatory. It works for Australia.

Yes it's mandatory
But it's plagued by making uninformed (or drastically underinformed) people vote.
So it doesn't work so there. :P

[Enigma_Nova]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
So what? Don't they have a right to decide who their leader is? Or do you believe only that smart people have the right to a democracy?

I believe that decisions should be entrusted only to those who desire to make them.

Why can't we have a two-levelled democracy? People could vote for how much they think other people's votes are worth.
Or would that just -increase- the value of thoughtless idiot votes?

[Q Classic]

Hookers in the booth? Or election tables in the strip clubs?

well, i figure you'll have to deliver on some of them, otherwise they won't come again...

as for the actual mechanics of it... i'll leave that for other, bigger heads to figure out.

[Traianvs]

Originally posted by shawnmmcc
Do you want people who are too lazy to research voting records and actual positions voting? We have too many lazy voters who just vote party line or vote based on attack ads already. I'll never forget one election, when I lived in Ohio, where they have elected judges.

Since the race was non-partisan, nobody ran any info on the judges. In desperation, on election day I went to both party headquarters - Democrat and Republican. Neither had any concrete data on their candidates record as judges or even lawyers. They looked at me like I was an alien - all I wanted was facts!

I think the lottery mentioned earlier is the only one that would work. Make it a check-off on your tax return, and voting enters you in it. Make the pay-off at least 100 million, and you will lets lots of people who are too lazy to vote knowledgably out in droves. What an improvement.

And then they say America is an all-democracy nation

Hold election day on sunday. Most people can make it that day.
Also the fact that there are basically just 2 parties (democrats and republicans) that you will vote for, doesn't really give me the impression of a solid democracy... If I lived in America I would have to choose between 2 evils, of course one of them more evil than the other

[rah]

Republicans don't care since they always pray for a lower turnout.

But really, if you're too lazy to vote, I don't think your opinion deserves to be counted. The same could be said for those that have to be given extra motivation to vote. Having a say in things should be motivation enough.

[Stefu]

Yeah. It should be made harder to vote. Reinstate the literacy requirement and the poll tax, require all the votes to be cast between 02:00 and 03:00, have one voting location for every 5 million citizens and have those locations staffed by ninjas who attempt to cut up everybody who tries to cast his vote. That, by God, would truly separate the wheat from the chaff and the committed voters from the non-committed ones.

Back in the good old days candidates saw to it that liquid refreshments were available to voters at the polling places. It was such a great idea. I have no idea why it was discontinued.

Were those refreshments served before or after the voting?

[Kuciwalker]

If we passed a law require people to vote, people would just elect someone on the platform that he would repeal that law

[Imran Siddiqui]

have those locations staffed by ninjas who attempt to cut up everybody who tries to cast his vote.

Ninjas .

Were those refreshments served before or after the voting?

Both, dammit

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Enigma_Nova

I believe that decisions should be entrusted only to those who desire to make them.

Translation: The smart ones. Though I do agree with you.

Or would that just -increase- the value of thoughtless idiot votes?

It would.

[Stefu]

Ninjas make EVERYTHING awesome.

[Q Classic]

But really, if you're too lazy to vote, I don't think your opinion deserves to be counted. The same could be said for those that have to be given extra motivation to vote. Having a say in things should be motivation enough.

obviously, rah, you don't like orgasms too much, otherwise you'd think that was a good motivation/perk.

[Spiffor]

1) Let there be a stake in elections. When the government (whether local / state / federal government) will have more power than unelected bureaucracies / lobbies / corporations, people will vote because they'll know it's important.

2) Have differentiated parties. Save some disagreements on abortion and other societal issues, there is no structurated cleavage in American politics. As a result, people often vote for the party they have always felt attached with (for no real reason).

3) Have a more responsive electoral system. One of the reasons for low turnout is the distrust in the political system as a whole, especially for the two parties that are sure to win. If the people who vote for something radically different had a chance to weigh, they'll vote much more often.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by rah
But really, if you're too lazy to vote, I don't think your opinion deserves to be counted. The same could be said for those that have to be given extra motivation to vote. Having a say in things should be motivation enough.

When your say is wasted (i.e. when you support a "small party"), I think the fault lies to the system rather than to the voter.

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

Second, provide a coupon to each voter, which provides a tax credit when included in the next year's tax return.

Like we needed another reason for people to attempt to vote more than once .

Nah. If anything, having more coupons than taxpayers in a given tax return will produce more questions than it's worth.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Spiffor
1) Let there be a stake in elections. When the government (whether local / state / federal government) will have more power than unelected bureaucracies / lobbies / corporations, people will vote because they'll know it's important.

2) Have differentiated parties. Save some disagreements on abortion and other societal issues, there is no structurated cleavage in American politics. As a result, people often vote for the party they have always felt attached with (for no real reason).

3) Have a more responsive electoral system. One of the reasons for low turnout is the distrust in the political system as a whole, especially for the two parties that are sure to win. If the people who vote for something radically different had a chance to weigh, they'll vote much more often.

1) This seem like a European problem, not American.
2) In many ways this is true. Bush has gone out this way to steal Democrat issues like steel tariffs, farm subsidies and Medicare prescription drug coverage. The only major issues that divide the parties today are taxes and war.
3) The low turnout has nothing to do with distrust, it has to do with satisfaction and complacency.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The low turnout has nothing to do with distrust, it has to do with satisfaction and complacency.

Jeez Ned, is there not enough wool pulled over your eyes?

[Sandman]

Standardise the voting system across the whole country. No matter where you are in the country, everyone should vote in the same way. Preferably without daft gizmos.

Replace the electoral college with something else. Something more democratic. I don't care if you're 'really a republic'.

Get a zero-tolerance policy going towards gerrymandering and other types of corruption.

[Whoha]

Originally posted by Stefu
Yeah. It should be made harder to vote. Reinstate the literacy requirement and the poll tax, require all the votes to be cast between 02:00 and 03:00, have one voting location for every 5 million citizens and have those locations staffed by ninjas who attempt to cut up everybody who tries to cast his vote. That, by God, would truly separate the wheat from the chaff and the committed voters from the non-committed ones.



Were those refreshments served before or after the voting?

during, vote early, vote often.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Ned
3) The low turnout has nothing to do with distrust, it has to do with satisfaction and complacency.

Wow
You and I have a tradition of disagreement, and I often wonder where you get your perception of reality from. But this one is the most surprising statement I've ever read from you

[gopher]

If you entice people to vote without them being informed, you will have a screwed up government. Low turnout is not good, but I rather have a low turnout with mostly informed people than high turnout with uninformed people.

[Ned]

Spiffor and Imran, my observation about low voter turnout is from experience and from polls conducted over the years.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Ned
Spiffor and Imran, my observation about low voter turnout is from experience and from polls conducted over the years.

That's strange, my courses of participatory science do give a high importance to party distrust, but none to complacency with the system. Maybe that's because none of the many scientosts striving for the reason of low turnout cared to measure it
Besides, most non-voters I got to talk to during campaigns were rather talking about how they wouldn't give their vote to corrupt politicians, rather than how the system was so perfect they didn't want to have a say in it...

[Spiffor]

But if you can provide me these numerous polls over the years, I'll shut up.