On Dec 30, 6:31*pm, "CW" wrote:
"DGDevin" wrote in message

m...





"Leon" wrote in message
m...

You know in communist countries and dictatorships the people are required
to vote.

Some democratic countries (including Australia, Belgium, Switzerland,
Mexico, Argentina and Greece) have a similar requirement, and it seems to
work quite well for them.

BTW, have you noticed how few actual Communist countries there are left?

Thank goodness we have the right not to vote. *Voting for the sake of
voting IMHO sends the wrong message, I think it tells the counters that
you actually want one of the people running for office.

All you have to do is deliberately spoil your ballot and you vote for
nobody, or there could be a "None of the above" choice.

Mandatory voting would be a modest infringement on our liberty, but it
would serve such a compelling public interest that IMO it would be worth
it.

What public interest? If one is not willing to vote, they probably haven't
the knowledge to make an informed vote. Lots of people choosing candidates
by coin toss does no one any good. If there are only 50 people in the
country that are willing to vote, then the election should be decided by the
50 that are concerned enough about the way the country is run.

Which is better, for a voting populace: to be uninformed and vote or
to be mis-informed and vote.

Where SHOULD one get their information?

Again: if you aren't reading source documents (or cross-referencing
your sources against them, periodically, to verify the objectivity of
the reporting), then ... you're just listening to what you want to
hear: slice or hook ... whatever your stripe is.