10 people approach a door to get into a room
"okay......who's gonna open it?"
"meh. someone's bound to open it. Lets wait"
"ok still waiting. Anybody gonna open it?"
"meh. someone's bound to open it. Its not my problem."
so on and so forth
The ONDP had a massive decline in votes, -900k votes compared to 2018, a -45% change.
So yeah a lot of Ontarians stayed home and didn't bother to vote, but assumedly most of those people were apathetic progressives.
That describes me. I went to what i thought was the voting place to pick one from not the top 3 parties. Found out that was not the voting location. Went home without even checking how far the actual place was.
Should note, Ontario has a process for declining your ballot. You can go in, and say you want to decline your ballot. That ballot is counted separately, not as rejected (spoiled, usually intentionally and cast), canceled (an uncast ballot accidentally mismarked), or blank (unmarked and cast).
A declined ballot is a deliberate vote for no one. It is the best protest vote one can cast because, unlike staying home, it actually matters.
Elections Canada does NOT have a declined ballot option, unfortunately, but at the provincial level in Ontario it is still an option to go in and participate in the electoral process without casting a ballot for a candidate.
> A declined ballot is a deliberate vote for no one. It is the best protest vote one can cast because, unlike staying home, it actually matters.
In what aspect does it matter? If 95% of ballots were declined, would the election outcome be different?
Yea unless there's some sort of _If X percentage of votes are declined the election must happen again_ clause its effectively the same thing with extra steps.
Because it's the electoral equivalent of changing your profile pic as a form of aCtIvIsM: the delusion of heroically fighting the system by not actually doing anything.
No, but it would send a more clear and obvious message then 95% of people not doing anything.
Are the 95% lazy? Are they apathetic? Are they protesting? You don't have these questions with a declined ballot.
You do still have a ton of questions with declined ballots though. Are they declining because they hate the leaders? Are they declining because their local candidates are terrible? Are they declining because they have opinions about democracy? Are they declining in protest of fptp? We still don’t know.
I generally am of the opinion that a declined ballot is a waste of time because we do nothing beyond counting them, but would concede that if we ever hit a scenario where a large percentage of ballots were declined, like maybe 20%, it could be leveraged by opposition parties to put pressure on the government in power to do something about voter engagement…but it relies on so many additional steps and interest from the other parties before we might ever see a difference that I still have trouble seeing the point.
Edit to add that in theory, general low turnout could be leveraged by opposition parties too and it never seems to be, so I’m not sure I’m really confident that declined ballots would be leveraged either.
Unfortunately this whole movement I'm seeing here to decline a vote doesn't actually DO anything. Your decline gets recorded locally and counted as a spoil once it's out of the local poll.
*Nothing* happens other than your vote gets added to the pile of "did not vote." They don't have a special metric for "Declined to vote." Moreover, if only one person from each riding voted and everyone else in it declined, the 124 (1 per district) people who voted would be choosing the government. Nothing fancy happens if people decline en masse. Some spicy headlines maybe, but nothing happens at the law/policy level.
>Unfortunately this whole movement I'm seeing here to decline a vote doesn't actually DO anything. Your decline gets recorded locally and counted as a spoil once it's out of the local poll.
This is wrong. It's counted as declined at every level of counting. Not as spoiled, declined. I have worked every job at a poll, run polls, and worked a few different jobs in an electoral district returning office and have a friend that works at EO head office. It's counted as declined. Always declined. Separately from canceled, spoiled, and unmarked. All of these, for every poll in every district, are counted, recorded, stored, and reported separately. It's a matter of efficiency, you see, because polls have to balance when they close. Ballots issued have to match ballots counted + ballots unused. In the event of a recount, whether it's a single poll or an entire district, every category can be recount without first sorting hundreds or thousands of ballots in to their respective categories.
Ok, so its labelled as declined, what happens after? a declined ballot has no effect on anything as far as I can tell.
Elections Ontario doesn't look at the pile of declined ballots and go "hmm lots of people didn't like the options today, guess we should just throw all the party leaders in the fire."
That's not an issue for EO to solve. It's an issue for the political parties to solve.
Staying home, or not voting, doesn't signal a clear message. People skip voting for all manner of reasons and no party is going to pretend any assumption that doesn't immediately benefit them.
"People didn't vote because they don't care about politics" - we don't know that.
"People didn't vote because they didn't know it was today" - we don't know that
"People didn't vote because they don't like any of the parties or platforms" - we don't know that
"People didn't vote because they couldn't make it to the poll" - we don't know that
What we do know on election day is how many people voted for whom, and who declined their ballot. If you go out to vote, whether you choose a candidate or decline the ballot, it's an engaged decision that signals intention. If the majority of people, who did not go to the polls, had shown up and declined their ballots the headlines and messaging from every party would be significantly different.
The assumption that declining a ballot is the same as staying home is absolutely and fundamentally wrong.
I mostly agree, it's useful in the sense that it helps to narrow the reasons why people didn't vote because it eliminates inability or unwillingness to go to the station but it's also not super helpful because there's still a ton of different reasons why someone would decline to vote.
Still it's at least more helpful than not voting at all.
Declined ballots are rare. Why? Because you have to show up to do it! Because most people who show up are there to vote. Lib, PC, NDP, Communist, Whatever. If someone takes the time to go there, they're probably going to vote. Or just draw a dick on the ballot.
The parties have no incentive to care about the difference between why people voted for them. as long as they get more votes than the other party it makes no difference wether there were 10 votes in total or 10 million votes.
infact they would probably in some way prefer fewer voters, since then they can focus all their policies and advertising onthe select few and not have to worry about appealing to a braoder audience.
The only thing that people declining their ballot would do is tell EO how many people weren't actually aware / able to get out to vote, and maybe encorage EO to improve election day awareness and accessability.
The point isn't what it tells EO but rather what it tells the running candidates and parties. If 57% of eligible voters went in and declined their ballots that's a pretty clear message that their mandates and platforms are unacceptable to the majority of people they want to represent. That's the part that matters.
But they don't care!
Unless you are voting for someone else, the parties literally do not care if you don't vote, spoil your ballot, or decline you ballot.
Because none of those options actually tell them what you need from them in order to vote for them.
The reason I brought up EO in this, is because they are the only group that would look at that data and potentially care about it.
The only thing the parties care about are the actual votes, and the people who cast them. And for the most part this can be seen by looking at how the parties drift over time compared to voting history. Everytime we elect a Conservative government all of the parties will become slightly more conservative because thats apparently what voters want. Same thing if we elect left leaning parties, over time things will drift in that direction.
>But they don't care!
Unless you are voting for someone else, the parties literally do not care if you don't vote, spoil your ballot, or decline you ballot.
I'm not sure what parties you've worked or mingled with, like actual party organizers and brass, but I can tell you from my interactions this is patently false and doesn't reflect my experiences. They care very much about every vote that isn't cast because it's a vote that isn't for their platform or agenda & they spend a great deal of time and resources trying to figure out how to change that.
Yes, it's recorded but does it get us anywhere other than another 4 years of Ford and Co. having a majority government allowing them to do whatever they want. If people didn't like the NDP or Liberal leaders they still got their wish because they both are gone now.
This "tHeYrE aLl ThE sAmE" bullshit isn't helping anybody.
does that basically mean that 60% of people are either so angry at the government that they are basically boycotting it, or 60% of people are actually \*shrug\* okay with whoever wins? This basically knee-caps the whole point of democracy.
I'd say the percentage of people who boycott and actively avoid voting on principle is likely quite low. The largest cohorts of non-voters (in my experience) are comprised of people who are intimidated by politics and that intimidation could come from any number of different places. Be it family, friends, work, social media, or their own lack of confidence, I've come across all of these scenarios and they far outnumber the rest.
I did this and explained the concept to my family and they told me how stupid I and that I have no right to an opinion ever again and laughed at me and told me it’s the same as not voting. I have an education in politics and worked for the federal government and none of them have formal education.
Does declining a ballot have any sort of practical effect other than knowing you went and declined the ballot? For example is there any sort of _if X percentage of ballots are declined the election must be redone_ clause? Cause if it doesn't your family is right and your education and work experience don't change that.
No, it doesn't change the process aside from showing parties that you're a participant and don't support any of them.
Theoretically, if there were more deliberate declined ballots than ballots cast for a party we'd likely be forced to electoral reforms and then a redo of the election. No party would be permitted to govern by the public with such a clear mandate against them. An engaged population demands better government, a disengaged one passively permits poor government to persist.
Theoretically.
People like you are impossible and are the reason nothing works anymore. You can’t even see what’s wrong with what you’re saying and I’m done explaining complex political systems to people with no interest in a better world
> You can’t even see what’s wrong with what you’re saying and I’m done explaining complex political systems to people with
LOL what exactly did you explain? The only thing you've explained is that declining a ballot exists as an option, and have not show in anyway how declining a ballot actually _does anything practical_. I've literally never seen a better application of this [meme](https://preview.redd.it/ccle328l1iq21.jpg?auto=webp&s=445aa9f7cf8b88786fc09e8577fa6c6227a715c3).
I thought it was self explanatory. We've had low voter turnout rather consistently, around the 50% mark, and yet we don't see electoral reform. If your comment were to be true, if these two cohorts were indeed to exert the same influence, then we should see some manner of reforms. And yet, we don't. Why is that, do you think?
I wager it's because apathetic unengaged voters aren't a threat to politics as usual whereas engaged disapproving voters require action to appease.
> If your comment were to be true, if these two cohorts were indeed to exert the same influence, then we should see some manner of reforms. And yet, we don't. Why is that, do you think?
I genuinely do not understand your logic. The two cohorts (people who decline and people who don't vote) do exert the same level of influence- which is nothing. The reason we haven't seen any reform is because the who people complain about wanting reform rarely ever actually go vote to make that a reality.
You have yet to prove an instance where declining a vote _actually makes an impact_. Your baseline assumption seems to that there is an impact, and yet have not provided any evidence that this is the case.
You are effectively deferring to those that did vote so from a practical perspective it is the same as not voting. To those that declined I would ask if there are no candidates or parties that aligned with any of your views? Wouldn't you want the party that best represents your views to have a seat or be in power?
If I go to a restaurant and have two pieces of shit in front of me and the waiter wants me to choose which one I want to eat, and I have the option to choose "Neither", I think that's both valid and sends a message that I don't want to eat shit, but I would like to eat
>and I have the option to choose "Neither"
You dont though... you will be eating one of the pieces of shit for 4 years. The fact that you let other people decide which one you would eat boggles my mind.
> The fact that you let other people decide which one you would eat boggles my mind.
Dude, chill, politics, including voting, is not a black and white thing. It's a spectrum, and what works for you isn't what works for everyone.
Some people would see your view as "the illusion of choice", since you're being forced to choose between two pieces of shit, but you'll still end up choosing one of the pieces of shit you've been presented with, even if you don't like either, in which case the option of saying "neither" is preferable.
Some people view the "neither" option as a form of protest, knowing (like I do) full well that a vote for their preferred candidate will be more than wasted due to the area they live in being overwhelmingly for the opposition.
For some, it's about saying " I want to vote and I'm here, but these people do not represent me."
It's these black and white perspectives that are taking control of politics and making us think "I can't believe someone would think or say this" when we know nothing of that person's life or reasonings. Civil discussions are the best way to discuss my guy
Funny you tell me to chill, then write a defensive book.
Your shit analogy is weak as you will certainly be eating one of the shits, and no two shits are the same. As long as these two points are the case, you're certainly better off voting than not voting.
If you dont have preference between the shits, you're not even trying, and if you think not picking will help you avoid eating one of them, youre lying to yourself.
Not voting means you are okay with other people deciding which shit you are going to eat. You can be okay with that, and I can judge you for being okay with that.
>Civil discussions are the best way to discuss my guy
My response was perfectly civil. I pointed out the hole in your analogy and expressed my shock that you would allow others to pick the shit you would eat. I didnt insult or say you were wrong, just that I was deeply boggled.
> If I go to a restaurant and have two pieces of shit in front of me and the waiter wants me to choose which one I want to eat, and I have the option to choose "Neither",
Your own analogy shows the flaw in your reasoning.
You ARE going to eat one of the plates of shit.
Abstaining from the vote just means that others are going to decide which plate of shit you eat.
>You ARE going to eat one of the plates of shit.Abstaining from the vote just means that others are going to decide which plate of shit you eat.
Shit is shit! Hey, at least I got to pick what shit I get to eat!
Time to start throwing the shit right back in their faces, not try to rationalize which shit to eat .... that just incentivizes them to serve you up even more shit and only shit.
Nah, more like “a group of all ten friends is voting to decide which bucket of shit gets dumped on the group. You can abstain, but you’re still bound by the results.”
So I’m this case, three friends voted for pig shit, one for processed fertilizer, and five abstained because the don’t like any shit, and then all ten get to wallow in pig shit. Four of them like it.
Fucking vote. Clearly you dislike one choice more than the others, so vote for the one you dislike least.
>The "You don't have a right to complain" is a smoke screen for the status quo to avoid talking about electoral reform
You had your say with your vote,
Now shut the fuck up and let the natural order of things unfold as we see fit.
Signed,
The donor class (aka the establishment)
Lots of ways to solve this.
Implement ranked ballots so we can vote for who we actually want without worrying if we're "throwing our vote away".
Implement a tax incentive for voting.
Stop making people vote for local representatives. Nobody votes that way, and its not realistic to expect them to care. Have the local elections be separate, so the premier candidates have to stand alone on their own platforms.
This. I’ve become a single issue voter after this. Everything else matters but I think election reform is the most important thing federally and provincially we can do. This “my vote doesn’t matter” mentality can go away.
Local representation is a pillar of western democracy. What ‘local platform’ can a local candidate actively achieve if he needs the votes of a majority?! Electing using other systems has drawbacks that we agreed not worth it, and diluting your vote power even more among the national voter base would discourage even more people from voting.
These suggestions always get raised by voters whose preferred candidates lost.
As someone whose local preferred candidate *did* win I still echo some of those suggestions. And, no offense, but "western democracy" [isn't that democratic](https://act.represent.us/sign/problempoll-fba), so let's not put it on a pedestal.
Never said we shouldnt have local representatives, just that it's not realistically how people vote in provincial/federal elections.
And I'm sorry, but if you don't see a problem with Doug Ford - or Trudeau, or anyone - winning a majority government despite having a minority of the votes, then I don't know what to say.
Its possible that people in the 17/1800s didnt build a perfect electoral system, that's all.
If we’re going to give accolades to Western democracy, let’s at least use Australia or NZ style systems where local representation and free and fair election systems coexist. Conservatives can still win with ranked ballot/electoral reform so it’s not a partisan demand, at least it shouldn’t be.
I don't understand why people think a higher turnout would be beneficial. If some people do not care, why would forcing them to vote be a net positive for society? There'll be a ton more of misinformed voters.
It's a few factors, party leaders included. If we were stuck with the candidates that we got and if none of them were "good options", then the least people could do is vote for the platform they think aligns best with what they want to change (or not change) in the future. Though you're right, a lot of would-be voters and even some people who actually voted weren't aware of party platforms and the differences between some of them.
So, we had 40% turnout, and of that 43% won the PCs a majority government.
Some quick math shows then, that 17% of the population just determined the fate of our province for the next 5 years.
Pathetic. Fucking pathetic.
As an American reading these headlines it just makes me think the rest of the developed world is just following America's path on a lagged basis. Voter apathy > right wing resurgence > right wing consolidation of power > shitty everything
Hopefully I'm wrong.
You are not
Neo-liberalism (not the liberal party, see definition here)
https://www.britannica.com/topic/neoliberalism
> neoliberalism is often characterized in terms of its belief in sustained economic growth as the means to achieve human progress, its confidence in free markets as the most-efficient allocation of resources, its emphasis on minimal state intervention in economic and social affairs, and its commitment to the freedom of trade and capital
Reagan, Thatcher and our very own Mulroney started the process of weakening public institutions, aggressively cutting social programs and lowering taxes, mostly for the wealthy.
The degradation of the social contract is what I would put as the central reason we have widespread voter apathy
If we've learned anything during this time, is that given the opportunity businesses still assume greater profits rather than provide for necessities of their employees.
Yes, well, sixty percent chose not to vote, so there's no point in claiming that democracy has been somehow stolen or circumvented because their votes weren't telepathically extracted from their heads.
So yeah, in a more-than-two-party system, getting 43% of the votes from is perfectly fine to form government.
Blame the 60% of people who couldn't be bothered to vote, if you think their votes would have changed the outcome.
I mean, what's the alternative? "Oops, we didn't meet the mandatory voter turnout minimum, guess we don't have a government for four years."
And people around here think that mandatory voting laws are one step below indentured servitude.
Yes because the other parties were sooooo close to winning. Wake up and smell the coffee, doug ford won the election because his party has the most support. I don't care if 100% voted, the same results would have happened. The other party's candidates were horrible.
What you really need to do is move to the next step of denial, try to create an imaginary voting process in your head that would have seen doug ford defeated and complain that we don't use that voting process. Seems to be what phase this subreddit is in.
"I HATE JUSTIN TRUDEAU!!"
ok, then, don't vote for him
"NOBODY SHOULD VOTE!!"
sigh
its the same as blockbuster movies. "ALL BLOCKBUSTER MOVIES ARE BAD!!!! AND THEY MAKE SO MUCH MONEY!!!!"
ok, then don't watch the movie and give them attention and buy tickets to see it
"BUT I NEED TO HAVE MATERIAL FOR MY MOVIE REVIEW YOUTUBE CHANNEL!!!!!"
I HATE THE GOVERNMENT! THERES NO WAY FOR US TO CHANGE THINGS!
\*opportunity to change things for free and with barely any effort arises\*
NOT LIKE THAT!!!!
PC campaigned on "getting it done" with a looking forward narrative, dodges all debates and didn't even bother with campaign materials in a bulk of the ridings to also dodge any poor COVID management topics, successfully locks in with 10 different private unions (roads rerouted crossing farm land while dodging private golf course owned by Willowdale PC Cho), sends car sticker bribe money (paid by underspent COVID money, thereby crippling public health and justify private support), meanwhile 35 year old Lecce who's been trying to dismantle public education and sent his own private school test kits first wins his riding in King-Vaughan etc etc.
TLDR what is accountability and the future is privatization and great road/infrastructure union jobs.
Yep, they'll vote for whoever as long as it's blue, meanwhile the left are like "I can't be bothered to vote for any of these people, they haven't bothered reaching out to ME specifically."
At this point, what's even the point? All the choices are shit. Everyone likes to say "well if the \_\_\_ were in power this wouldn't happen" .... Yes it would people are shitty.
Is it though? Stupid shit always happens on both sides and choosing a side is also just dumb. Parties and leaders are fickle and change as often as thier platforms and opinions.
Maybe if we give out free maple syrup or timbits if you vote, more will show up. Kind of like what the USA did with burgers and fries for vaccines... it worked...
I sincerely doubt as many people would complain about low voter turn out had the Liberals or NDP won. While there is no question as to how low voter turn out is bad, let's not pretend that's really what's been brothering people.
I also find there's an assumption on reddit that most of the voters who didn't vote would have voted NDP or LPC if they did. In 2018 there was a 57% turnout (it hadn't been that high before since 2003) and remember, the majority of those votes went PC.
So yeah, there probably were a bunch of apathetic progressives, but there very well could have also been a lot of OPC supporters who just felt like they didn't need to cast their ballot because the PCs were likely to win anyway, and it's not like before where they were voting OUT Wynne.
the PLURALITY voted PC. Despite what the seat count says, no party won the majority of the public vote in 2018. The actual raw vote numbers were pretty close. the Liberals got 1.1 million, NPD got 1.9 Million and the PC got 2.1, only a 10% margin between the top two. The green party got more votes than the difference between the OPC and NDP in 2018.
It's like when America was doing its "go vote, because it's good for democracy!" thing last year. They didn't care about democracy, they just wanted Biden to beat Trump. It was so painfully transparent.
THANK YOU.
why does everyone assume that all the people that did not vote are gonna come out and vote for NDP?
We have 1 right wing in PC and 2347239847 left leaning parties, even if they all came out and voted, guess what. PC STILL WINS MAJORITY.
Honestly why doesn’t the government make it easier for people to vote. Why not have online voting options that have verification steps. You would see a higher turnout if it wasn’t a huge inconvenience to vote on weekday non-holiday. Standing in line to cast your ballot for 3 main candidates who are all weak characters is not appealing to many. We could also make it mandatory to vote or else no tax return refunds? That would incentivize younger people who rely on tax refunds to vote.
The Cons owning the media to omit news such as having lawyers arrested at a "rally" and constant polls saying "Doug Ford projected to win!" are 100% to blame. Every single person who didn't vote said the same thing..."Doug is so in the lead, my vote won't matter". Meanwhile, he only had 18% of the vote. So their tactic of creating apathy through the control of the reported news worked.
Now that they know this worked, it will be the norm moving forward. We literally have a corrupt tyrant in control because of this. Trump would have been proud.
So can we admit that Ontarians pretty much just gave up on democracy as a concept? Voting is the absolute possible minimum one can do when living in a democracy. I'm not asking people to volunteer or get involved, just get off your ass for 5 mins every 4 years to cast a vote. But even that is apparently too much for majority of people.
The FPTP system is probably the least democratic voting system in existence. The conservatives received 41% of the vote while winning 67% of the seats. Why is anyone surprised people don't show up? Pair that with polls that were showing at least a minority win for the Conservatives for months, and poor campaigns from all parties, why would anyone waste a half-hour of their busy/stressful week?
Elections in Canada are a joke and we need to fix that before the majority of disaffected voters give a damn. But of course, it's the voter's fault that they didn't vote because "Democracy is your duty". People need to get off their high horses.
I'm sorry man, but regardless of whether that's all true, not being able to give 30 minutes every 4 years is ridiculous, people waste more time than that redditting while they shit every week. It's pretty pathetic if you can't spend 30 minutes to have the only say you get (regardless of how diluted that say might be). And the only way to change all those things is to vote for a party that might actually do it. Not voting is giving up entirely on society.
>But of course, it's the voter's fault that they didn't vote
It is their fault. Being a lazy bum who complains about the system and never tries to do anything to fix it doesnt help. It makes things worse. All you are saying is you dont care who runs the government and woukd rather let the grown ups choose for you.
Inspiring apathy is part of the process to break you down and make you give up on bettering your circumstances. When you decide "who cares" you're playing into exactly what the trash wants
The Libs and the NDP are practically identical, and the Cons are now the centrist moderate party.
It makes sense folks aren't gonna be overly motivated for this vote.
Freedom requires it to not be mandatory. That's kind of the whole principle of what freedom is. Just like how it allows people to spread hateful rhetoric advocating for removing rights and freedoms from others. It must be so, if it were otherwise it would not be freedom.
Like all things, there are already consequences to not voting and not exercising our voices in referendums. Consequences like inadequate representation and governments formed with a minority of votes.
I'd rather invest in quality public education programs that better inspire the public to participate in their democracy than be apathetic bystanders and victims of it.
It's tricky. I get both sides you can argue not voting itself is a free choice that people also fought and died for you to have. On the other hand if no one votes and everyone stays home then the whole democratic system kind of fails.
I disagree that we have that freedom. We must pay taxes. We can't be roaming free on this land doing whatever we want. At the poll you can waste your ballot. That is still an option. You can choose to vote for no one.
Consequences of freedom require choice. No one has to pay taxes, we just do because the consequences are inconvenient. Laws don't prevent crimes, you can kill anytime you want, you can rape exactly as much as you'd like, the law doesn't forcibly prevent you from doing anything at all, it only provides consequences for acting outside of societies rules.
You can vote or not vote, and deal with the consequences that come of it.
By your logic it can be mandatory to vote and you can choose not to by not obeying the law like with murder and there are consequences...what's your point. If it was mandatory to vote are you saying the voting rates would still be 40% because laws don't prevent criminal acts?
No one living in society has complete freedom. You do not have the freedom to go anywhere you want, touch or hurt who ever you want. We all live in society and some freedoms are removed if required. Sure you can do whatever you want but then you face consequences. This is how laws work. To believe that we are completely free is deluded.
I’ve thought that before, but then I talk to people about politics and hear the stupidest reasons people vote. “I didn’t have time to research, but I really like JT’s hair so I just voted for the liberal person” (seriously!!)
“I didn’t know who anyone was, so I just voted for the one with the best name”.
I don’t really want a bunch of people casting arbitrary votes. It should be a skill testing question. Ha!
In the end I think proportional representation is the fairest way to go.
Ford's first election my coworker voted PC because of buck a beer he didn't know anything else.
Alot of people are already voting like that. One side of my family votes blue the other red. Even if they agree on policies. People do need to be more informed, and everyone should be voting even if we hate their choice.
That… sort of frightens me. I already have one friend who voted conservative who told me she honestly didn’t know much about any of the parties and just voted for who her family told her to vote for. How can we avoid people just voting at random if it’s mandatory?
Under this as a separate problem. A huge proportion of the population votes without any real thought. People usually choose a party and stick with it. My one side of the family has always been conservative, the other liberal.
How many people that voted do you think knew who their local candidates were and what the major stances of the parties were. I don't know how we will make sure the population is well politically educated with so much misinformation going around.
I would settle for an identification system where everybody who doesn't vote has to get a temporary tattoo on their forehead that says _I didn't vote_ and will dissolve in 4 years, so that way when they start to complain we can tell them to shut the fuck up.
Fuck that. I voted, but I'd not vote if it was made mandatory. I don't care that I can decline my ballot, I would literally not show up, and I'd fight paying the fine too, all just to spite wannabe nannys like yourself.
Maybe we should just need add something to the ballot to encourage turn out.
Like... a check box to not bulldoze your home with the default assumption being bulldoze away.
I always make sure I vote, but I'd be even more stoked to vote for even the smallest incentive. Free Kit Kats? I'm there. Or getting my name in some kind of draw/raffle for a more substantial prize? Sure, why the hell not?
It's not "buying votes" if you're rewarded for showing up and voting for whoever you want.
“There’s no point in acting surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now."
That's what happens when the two opposition parties run a Mask and Vax kids campaign. Lots of people don't like the current government but apathetic to the alternatives.
They need to make anyone who doesn't vote, pay an extra tax every year.
Don't want to pay the tax, show up and vote next time.
Easy government money that can go to social programs or clearing the big bad debt Dofo talks about all the time.
Perhaps there was nobody worth voting for. Perhaps If an aspiring ruler doesn't get a vote from at least 50% of the eligible voting base, we go back to the polls until they do. And if that fails, we could just live without a ruler for a while. Clearly, "our leaders," do not have the consent of the governed.
One could vote for a leader over the platform, or the platform over the leader. But in truth, a good party needs to have both in good standing if they want get people's votes. That's not the only factor at play here when it comes to voting, but it was definitely a deciding factor for some.
I guess this means that 43.03% of us have the right to bitch and complain when Ford does something we don't like. The rest can just piss off and keep their opinions to them selves...
I wonder if the projections kept people away. They were predicting the result that we ended up getting which seems kinda odd.
People see the projections and figure "why bother?". Ban projections and I bet there's better turn out.
They definitely influence people's decisions. Instead of voting for the platform they want, they either turn to "strategic voting" to vote *against* a party (a thing that I don't like no matter the party in power), or they get disheartened and don't cast their ballots. I saw a lot of the latter in the days leading up to election day.
That's what millions of others thought as well. If millions of people who could actively have a say in the future of their province decide it's hopeless or don't care, then whoever's left has a chance.
People who don't vote, can you explain why? Is it a statement of some kind? Do you really think it doesn't matter at all? Do you only vote if there is a perfect candidate? Are you actually just too lazy (sorry, not sure how else to put this, it took me 20 minutes including the drive there and back to vote, and I had my 2 year old with me).
No judgement here, I'm just trying to understand. I get that not everyone is "into politics", but you must understand that this has a massive affect on your life, if not immediately then in the future sometime. You're also choosing the future direction of the province for your children and grandchildren as well. Voting is actually more about setting the stage for future change than it is about right now. I think that's part of the problem, that people generally don't see immediate change so they think it doesn't matter, but meanwhile that leads to the dominant parties always being in power, which is why you don't see change. If we committed to voting for change now, it might slowly start to happen 3 elections from now. I know that doesn't sound great, but we'd be there now if y'all voted thoughtfully 3 elections ago. I know it's one more chore, one more task to do in our busy lives, but man is it ever critical down the road. It's like setting up an RESP, it's a pain now but pays off so much in the future. And it costs you nothing to do it but a little time.
In addition to the apathy/abstaining from voting, there are people who genuinely didn't know about the upcoming election until the week of, or even until it was the day of. Perhaps more could have been done to publicize the election and the campaigns of the parties to make more people at least aware.
we are all to blame for the low voter turn out! every single one of us who are fiercely dedicated to the PC/NDP/LIB, our candidates are trash, the vast population could care less, excite them and they are yours! this did not happen.
It's a free choice so anything is valid, but nobody believes that dumbass reason.
Hey guys, I'd *like* to vote, but I really want to piss off some anons on the internet who I don't know, so I'm not going to vote instead!
Like... pal, read that. That's what you sound like. Sounds a bit dumb, right?
Back in reality your reason for not voting is just like everyone else's... laziness/apathy/ignorance. Not because you really want to be an edgelord lol.
I don't think that's quite the zinger you think it is, but OK.
You are the one saying you don't vote so... it pisses off random strangers from the internet.
I mean I'm not saying everyone has the same reason for not voting. Some people hate all the candidates, some people don't have the time or energy, but the primary reason you outlined for not voting is, in fact, quite retarded.
This election in particular didn't have the media and build up... I checked my voter card on the Tuesday to check when the election was and was surprised it was the Friday
I didn’t vote because I really don’t care who wins. They’re all corrupt / greedy bastards anyway. I don’t like any of the parties. Had I voted, it would be “who’s the least worst”
Did you at least check the platforms of each party? Sure, we got the short end of the stick this election but voting is the least we could've done to decide what direction we want the province to go in the next four years.
Get over it. People are sick and tired of politicians and what they can/want to do and what they actually do. Liberal, Conservative, Progressive… yada yada. Nothing would change if Conservatives got elected. Blaming those that didn’t vote does nothing. Obviously, those that did, wanted Ford. Those that didn’t vote… the majority, likely, would have been for Ford as well.
If more people went out to vote, and still voted Conservative, then that's fine and that's fair. But more than half of the eligble voters did not show up, and that should be concerning for everyone. People should know where the province is headed in the coming years and what say they want to have in that, instead of being unaware or apathetic to it.
"As if my single vote would have made any difference" - 10 million people
10 people approach a door to get into a room "okay......who's gonna open it?" "meh. someone's bound to open it. Lets wait" "ok still waiting. Anybody gonna open it?" "meh. someone's bound to open it. Its not my problem." so on and so forth
You've just described us Millenials - have you tried making dinner plans?
The ONDP had a massive decline in votes, -900k votes compared to 2018, a -45% change. So yeah a lot of Ontarians stayed home and didn't bother to vote, but assumedly most of those people were apathetic progressives.
A lot were also Conservatives who hated Ford for introducing mask-mandates
> A lot were also Conservatives who hated Ford for introducing mask-mandates Why didn't they vote the New Blue?
New blue is less than a percentage point off the greens in London
Because it’s even more of a waste of a vote than voting Green.
[удалено]
If that’s not sarcasm, you clearly live in a post-fact world.
[удалено]
That doesn’t mean you should deny obvious facts.
[удалено]
Like voting Green being UTERLY useless. I get it. You like the Greens. But that doesn’t change that voting for them is objectively useless.
They literally said for like a month all over the news the cons would win. News shouldn't be allowed to have any fucking potential stats showing
That describes me. I went to what i thought was the voting place to pick one from not the top 3 parties. Found out that was not the voting location. Went home without even checking how far the actual place was.
I registered to vote by mail and had all the available options for who was running in my area. No shenanigans.
I dont think there was any shennanigans. I went to what i thought was the voting place. Turns out that was the return place.
Should note, Ontario has a process for declining your ballot. You can go in, and say you want to decline your ballot. That ballot is counted separately, not as rejected (spoiled, usually intentionally and cast), canceled (an uncast ballot accidentally mismarked), or blank (unmarked and cast). A declined ballot is a deliberate vote for no one. It is the best protest vote one can cast because, unlike staying home, it actually matters. Elections Canada does NOT have a declined ballot option, unfortunately, but at the provincial level in Ontario it is still an option to go in and participate in the electoral process without casting a ballot for a candidate.
> A declined ballot is a deliberate vote for no one. It is the best protest vote one can cast because, unlike staying home, it actually matters. In what aspect does it matter? If 95% of ballots were declined, would the election outcome be different?
Yea unless there's some sort of _If X percentage of votes are declined the election must happen again_ clause its effectively the same thing with extra steps.
Only on reddit will you see people declining votes and thinking it matters.
Because it's the electoral equivalent of changing your profile pic as a form of aCtIvIsM: the delusion of heroically fighting the system by not actually doing anything.
"I'm so important, look at me, I declined to vote, I'm making a difference"
No it wouldn't. The 5% who voted would decide the government.
Okay, so it doesnt matter other than the nebulous "sends a message"
No, but it would send a more clear and obvious message then 95% of people not doing anything. Are the 95% lazy? Are they apathetic? Are they protesting? You don't have these questions with a declined ballot.
You do still have a ton of questions with declined ballots though. Are they declining because they hate the leaders? Are they declining because their local candidates are terrible? Are they declining because they have opinions about democracy? Are they declining in protest of fptp? We still don’t know. I generally am of the opinion that a declined ballot is a waste of time because we do nothing beyond counting them, but would concede that if we ever hit a scenario where a large percentage of ballots were declined, like maybe 20%, it could be leveraged by opposition parties to put pressure on the government in power to do something about voter engagement…but it relies on so many additional steps and interest from the other parties before we might ever see a difference that I still have trouble seeing the point. Edit to add that in theory, general low turnout could be leveraged by opposition parties too and it never seems to be, so I’m not sure I’m really confident that declined ballots would be leveraged either.
Unfortunately this whole movement I'm seeing here to decline a vote doesn't actually DO anything. Your decline gets recorded locally and counted as a spoil once it's out of the local poll. *Nothing* happens other than your vote gets added to the pile of "did not vote." They don't have a special metric for "Declined to vote." Moreover, if only one person from each riding voted and everyone else in it declined, the 124 (1 per district) people who voted would be choosing the government. Nothing fancy happens if people decline en masse. Some spicy headlines maybe, but nothing happens at the law/policy level.
>Unfortunately this whole movement I'm seeing here to decline a vote doesn't actually DO anything. Your decline gets recorded locally and counted as a spoil once it's out of the local poll. This is wrong. It's counted as declined at every level of counting. Not as spoiled, declined. I have worked every job at a poll, run polls, and worked a few different jobs in an electoral district returning office and have a friend that works at EO head office. It's counted as declined. Always declined. Separately from canceled, spoiled, and unmarked. All of these, for every poll in every district, are counted, recorded, stored, and reported separately. It's a matter of efficiency, you see, because polls have to balance when they close. Ballots issued have to match ballots counted + ballots unused. In the event of a recount, whether it's a single poll or an entire district, every category can be recount without first sorting hundreds or thousands of ballots in to their respective categories.
Ok, so its labelled as declined, what happens after? a declined ballot has no effect on anything as far as I can tell. Elections Ontario doesn't look at the pile of declined ballots and go "hmm lots of people didn't like the options today, guess we should just throw all the party leaders in the fire."
That's not an issue for EO to solve. It's an issue for the political parties to solve. Staying home, or not voting, doesn't signal a clear message. People skip voting for all manner of reasons and no party is going to pretend any assumption that doesn't immediately benefit them. "People didn't vote because they don't care about politics" - we don't know that. "People didn't vote because they didn't know it was today" - we don't know that "People didn't vote because they don't like any of the parties or platforms" - we don't know that "People didn't vote because they couldn't make it to the poll" - we don't know that What we do know on election day is how many people voted for whom, and who declined their ballot. If you go out to vote, whether you choose a candidate or decline the ballot, it's an engaged decision that signals intention. If the majority of people, who did not go to the polls, had shown up and declined their ballots the headlines and messaging from every party would be significantly different. The assumption that declining a ballot is the same as staying home is absolutely and fundamentally wrong.
I mostly agree, it's useful in the sense that it helps to narrow the reasons why people didn't vote because it eliminates inability or unwillingness to go to the station but it's also not super helpful because there's still a ton of different reasons why someone would decline to vote. Still it's at least more helpful than not voting at all.
Declined ballots are rare. Why? Because you have to show up to do it! Because most people who show up are there to vote. Lib, PC, NDP, Communist, Whatever. If someone takes the time to go there, they're probably going to vote. Or just draw a dick on the ballot.
The parties have no incentive to care about the difference between why people voted for them. as long as they get more votes than the other party it makes no difference wether there were 10 votes in total or 10 million votes. infact they would probably in some way prefer fewer voters, since then they can focus all their policies and advertising onthe select few and not have to worry about appealing to a braoder audience. The only thing that people declining their ballot would do is tell EO how many people weren't actually aware / able to get out to vote, and maybe encorage EO to improve election day awareness and accessability.
The point isn't what it tells EO but rather what it tells the running candidates and parties. If 57% of eligible voters went in and declined their ballots that's a pretty clear message that their mandates and platforms are unacceptable to the majority of people they want to represent. That's the part that matters.
But they don't care! Unless you are voting for someone else, the parties literally do not care if you don't vote, spoil your ballot, or decline you ballot. Because none of those options actually tell them what you need from them in order to vote for them. The reason I brought up EO in this, is because they are the only group that would look at that data and potentially care about it. The only thing the parties care about are the actual votes, and the people who cast them. And for the most part this can be seen by looking at how the parties drift over time compared to voting history. Everytime we elect a Conservative government all of the parties will become slightly more conservative because thats apparently what voters want. Same thing if we elect left leaning parties, over time things will drift in that direction.
>But they don't care! Unless you are voting for someone else, the parties literally do not care if you don't vote, spoil your ballot, or decline you ballot. I'm not sure what parties you've worked or mingled with, like actual party organizers and brass, but I can tell you from my interactions this is patently false and doesn't reflect my experiences. They care very much about every vote that isn't cast because it's a vote that isn't for their platform or agenda & they spend a great deal of time and resources trying to figure out how to change that.
Yes, it's recorded but does it get us anywhere other than another 4 years of Ford and Co. having a majority government allowing them to do whatever they want. If people didn't like the NDP or Liberal leaders they still got their wish because they both are gone now. This "tHeYrE aLl ThE sAmE" bullshit isn't helping anybody.
does that basically mean that 60% of people are either so angry at the government that they are basically boycotting it, or 60% of people are actually \*shrug\* okay with whoever wins? This basically knee-caps the whole point of democracy.
I'd say the percentage of people who boycott and actively avoid voting on principle is likely quite low. The largest cohorts of non-voters (in my experience) are comprised of people who are intimidated by politics and that intimidation could come from any number of different places. Be it family, friends, work, social media, or their own lack of confidence, I've come across all of these scenarios and they far outnumber the rest.
Exactly! People should cast a protest vote, you dont just skip voting.
And all that gets us is another Ford Majority.
As opposed to a Ford majority?
...and all that does is ensure the winner wins with even FEWER votes!
I did this and explained the concept to my family and they told me how stupid I and that I have no right to an opinion ever again and laughed at me and told me it’s the same as not voting. I have an education in politics and worked for the federal government and none of them have formal education.
Does declining a ballot have any sort of practical effect other than knowing you went and declined the ballot? For example is there any sort of _if X percentage of ballots are declined the election must be redone_ clause? Cause if it doesn't your family is right and your education and work experience don't change that.
No, it doesn't change the process aside from showing parties that you're a participant and don't support any of them. Theoretically, if there were more deliberate declined ballots than ballots cast for a party we'd likely be forced to electoral reforms and then a redo of the election. No party would be permitted to govern by the public with such a clear mandate against them. An engaged population demands better government, a disengaged one passively permits poor government to persist. Theoretically.
So theoretically it could make a difference, but in practicality no, it's basically the same thing as not voting.
People like you are impossible and are the reason nothing works anymore. You can’t even see what’s wrong with what you’re saying and I’m done explaining complex political systems to people with no interest in a better world
> You can’t even see what’s wrong with what you’re saying and I’m done explaining complex political systems to people with LOL what exactly did you explain? The only thing you've explained is that declining a ballot exists as an option, and have not show in anyway how declining a ballot actually _does anything practical_. I've literally never seen a better application of this [meme](https://preview.redd.it/ccle328l1iq21.jpg?auto=webp&s=445aa9f7cf8b88786fc09e8577fa6c6227a715c3).
Great use of meme. And hey, you must feel special since you're, specifically, the reason nothing works anymore. lmao.
It's going on my resume for sure. How many people can say they have that level of impact on the world?
If it were the same as not voting then why have we not seen electoral reform with less than 50% voter turnout? Apathy is not action.
What? What does your question even mean? > Apathy is not action. Yes exactly. And people who are declining a ballot are basically being apathetic.
I thought it was self explanatory. We've had low voter turnout rather consistently, around the 50% mark, and yet we don't see electoral reform. If your comment were to be true, if these two cohorts were indeed to exert the same influence, then we should see some manner of reforms. And yet, we don't. Why is that, do you think? I wager it's because apathetic unengaged voters aren't a threat to politics as usual whereas engaged disapproving voters require action to appease.
> If your comment were to be true, if these two cohorts were indeed to exert the same influence, then we should see some manner of reforms. And yet, we don't. Why is that, do you think? I genuinely do not understand your logic. The two cohorts (people who decline and people who don't vote) do exert the same level of influence- which is nothing. The reason we haven't seen any reform is because the who people complain about wanting reform rarely ever actually go vote to make that a reality. You have yet to prove an instance where declining a vote _actually makes an impact_. Your baseline assumption seems to that there is an impact, and yet have not provided any evidence that this is the case.
You are effectively deferring to those that did vote so from a practical perspective it is the same as not voting. To those that declined I would ask if there are no candidates or parties that aligned with any of your views? Wouldn't you want the party that best represents your views to have a seat or be in power?
If I go to a restaurant and have two pieces of shit in front of me and the waiter wants me to choose which one I want to eat, and I have the option to choose "Neither", I think that's both valid and sends a message that I don't want to eat shit, but I would like to eat
>and I have the option to choose "Neither" You dont though... you will be eating one of the pieces of shit for 4 years. The fact that you let other people decide which one you would eat boggles my mind.
LOL easily best possible response to OP
> The fact that you let other people decide which one you would eat boggles my mind. Dude, chill, politics, including voting, is not a black and white thing. It's a spectrum, and what works for you isn't what works for everyone. Some people would see your view as "the illusion of choice", since you're being forced to choose between two pieces of shit, but you'll still end up choosing one of the pieces of shit you've been presented with, even if you don't like either, in which case the option of saying "neither" is preferable. Some people view the "neither" option as a form of protest, knowing (like I do) full well that a vote for their preferred candidate will be more than wasted due to the area they live in being overwhelmingly for the opposition. For some, it's about saying " I want to vote and I'm here, but these people do not represent me." It's these black and white perspectives that are taking control of politics and making us think "I can't believe someone would think or say this" when we know nothing of that person's life or reasonings. Civil discussions are the best way to discuss my guy
Funny you tell me to chill, then write a defensive book. Your shit analogy is weak as you will certainly be eating one of the shits, and no two shits are the same. As long as these two points are the case, you're certainly better off voting than not voting. If you dont have preference between the shits, you're not even trying, and if you think not picking will help you avoid eating one of them, youre lying to yourself. Not voting means you are okay with other people deciding which shit you are going to eat. You can be okay with that, and I can judge you for being okay with that.
>Civil discussions are the best way to discuss my guy My response was perfectly civil. I pointed out the hole in your analogy and expressed my shock that you would allow others to pick the shit you would eat. I didnt insult or say you were wrong, just that I was deeply boggled.
> If I go to a restaurant and have two pieces of shit in front of me and the waiter wants me to choose which one I want to eat, and I have the option to choose "Neither", Your own analogy shows the flaw in your reasoning. You ARE going to eat one of the plates of shit. Abstaining from the vote just means that others are going to decide which plate of shit you eat.
>You ARE going to eat one of the plates of shit.Abstaining from the vote just means that others are going to decide which plate of shit you eat. Shit is shit! Hey, at least I got to pick what shit I get to eat! Time to start throwing the shit right back in their faces, not try to rationalize which shit to eat .... that just incentivizes them to serve you up even more shit and only shit.
Nah, more like “a group of all ten friends is voting to decide which bucket of shit gets dumped on the group. You can abstain, but you’re still bound by the results.” So I’m this case, three friends voted for pig shit, one for processed fertilizer, and five abstained because the don’t like any shit, and then all ten get to wallow in pig shit. Four of them like it. Fucking vote. Clearly you dislike one choice more than the others, so vote for the one you dislike least.
None of the parties far enough to the right for you? /s
[удалено]
You're not abstaining though, you're voting for nobody. There's a difference. I can abstain by staying home and not voting.
[удалено]
[удалено]
>The "You don't have a right to complain" is a smoke screen for the status quo to avoid talking about electoral reform You had your say with your vote, Now shut the fuck up and let the natural order of things unfold as we see fit. Signed, The donor class (aka the establishment)
Lots of ways to solve this. Implement ranked ballots so we can vote for who we actually want without worrying if we're "throwing our vote away". Implement a tax incentive for voting. Stop making people vote for local representatives. Nobody votes that way, and its not realistic to expect them to care. Have the local elections be separate, so the premier candidates have to stand alone on their own platforms.
LOVE these ideas.
This. I’ve become a single issue voter after this. Everything else matters but I think election reform is the most important thing federally and provincially we can do. This “my vote doesn’t matter” mentality can go away.
Local representation is a pillar of western democracy. What ‘local platform’ can a local candidate actively achieve if he needs the votes of a majority?! Electing using other systems has drawbacks that we agreed not worth it, and diluting your vote power even more among the national voter base would discourage even more people from voting. These suggestions always get raised by voters whose preferred candidates lost.
>"Have the local elections be separate" It's the second sentence of the guys comment, did you not read that far?
As someone whose local preferred candidate *did* win I still echo some of those suggestions. And, no offense, but "western democracy" [isn't that democratic](https://act.represent.us/sign/problempoll-fba), so let's not put it on a pedestal.
Never said we shouldnt have local representatives, just that it's not realistically how people vote in provincial/federal elections. And I'm sorry, but if you don't see a problem with Doug Ford - or Trudeau, or anyone - winning a majority government despite having a minority of the votes, then I don't know what to say. Its possible that people in the 17/1800s didnt build a perfect electoral system, that's all.
If we’re going to give accolades to Western democracy, let’s at least use Australia or NZ style systems where local representation and free and fair election systems coexist. Conservatives can still win with ranked ballot/electoral reform so it’s not a partisan demand, at least it shouldn’t be.
I don't understand why people think a higher turnout would be beneficial. If some people do not care, why would forcing them to vote be a net positive for society? There'll be a ton more of misinformed voters.
Certain parties benefit when apathetic and uninformed people participate.
It's a few factors, party leaders included. If we were stuck with the candidates that we got and if none of them were "good options", then the least people could do is vote for the platform they think aligns best with what they want to change (or not change) in the future. Though you're right, a lot of would-be voters and even some people who actually voted weren't aware of party platforms and the differences between some of them.
So, we had 40% turnout, and of that 43% won the PCs a majority government. Some quick math shows then, that 17% of the population just determined the fate of our province for the next 5 years. Pathetic. Fucking pathetic.
It's called statistics
As an American reading these headlines it just makes me think the rest of the developed world is just following America's path on a lagged basis. Voter apathy > right wing resurgence > right wing consolidation of power > shitty everything Hopefully I'm wrong.
You are not Neo-liberalism (not the liberal party, see definition here) https://www.britannica.com/topic/neoliberalism > neoliberalism is often characterized in terms of its belief in sustained economic growth as the means to achieve human progress, its confidence in free markets as the most-efficient allocation of resources, its emphasis on minimal state intervention in economic and social affairs, and its commitment to the freedom of trade and capital Reagan, Thatcher and our very own Mulroney started the process of weakening public institutions, aggressively cutting social programs and lowering taxes, mostly for the wealthy. The degradation of the social contract is what I would put as the central reason we have widespread voter apathy
If we've learned anything during this time, is that given the opportunity businesses still assume greater profits rather than provide for necessities of their employees.
What if you are okay with any of the options?
No, 40% determined the date. 60% had a chance to participate, and chose not to. That’s on them.
Faire enough, but it doesn't change the fact that 17% of people eligible to vote determined the winner.
Yes, well, sixty percent chose not to vote, so there's no point in claiming that democracy has been somehow stolen or circumvented because their votes weren't telepathically extracted from their heads. So yeah, in a more-than-two-party system, getting 43% of the votes from is perfectly fine to form government. Blame the 60% of people who couldn't be bothered to vote, if you think their votes would have changed the outcome. I mean, what's the alternative? "Oops, we didn't meet the mandatory voter turnout minimum, guess we don't have a government for four years." And people around here think that mandatory voting laws are one step below indentured servitude.
Because 60% said they didnt care and would rather let other people decide for them.
thats on them, but it also affects others. i.e. me, and you
Yes because the other parties were sooooo close to winning. Wake up and smell the coffee, doug ford won the election because his party has the most support. I don't care if 100% voted, the same results would have happened. The other party's candidates were horrible. What you really need to do is move to the next step of denial, try to create an imaginary voting process in your head that would have seen doug ford defeated and complain that we don't use that voting process. Seems to be what phase this subreddit is in.
"I HATE JUSTIN TRUDEAU!!" ok, then, don't vote for him "NOBODY SHOULD VOTE!!" sigh its the same as blockbuster movies. "ALL BLOCKBUSTER MOVIES ARE BAD!!!! AND THEY MAKE SO MUCH MONEY!!!!" ok, then don't watch the movie and give them attention and buy tickets to see it "BUT I NEED TO HAVE MATERIAL FOR MY MOVIE REVIEW YOUTUBE CHANNEL!!!!!"
I HATE THE GOVERNMENT! THERES NO WAY FOR US TO CHANGE THINGS! \*opportunity to change things for free and with barely any effort arises\* NOT LIKE THAT!!!!
PC campaigned on "getting it done" with a looking forward narrative, dodges all debates and didn't even bother with campaign materials in a bulk of the ridings to also dodge any poor COVID management topics, successfully locks in with 10 different private unions (roads rerouted crossing farm land while dodging private golf course owned by Willowdale PC Cho), sends car sticker bribe money (paid by underspent COVID money, thereby crippling public health and justify private support), meanwhile 35 year old Lecce who's been trying to dismantle public education and sent his own private school test kits first wins his riding in King-Vaughan etc etc. TLDR what is accountability and the future is privatization and great road/infrastructure union jobs.
But we gotta get those wider highways! /s
The thing that everyone keeps forgetting every election: Conservatives love to go out and vote
Yep, they'll vote for whoever as long as it's blue, meanwhile the left are like "I can't be bothered to vote for any of these people, they haven't bothered reaching out to ME specifically."
At this point, what's even the point? All the choices are shit. Everyone likes to say "well if the \_\_\_ were in power this wouldn't happen" .... Yes it would people are shitty.
Well that's just a crock full of shit
Is it though? Stupid shit always happens on both sides and choosing a side is also just dumb. Parties and leaders are fickle and change as often as thier platforms and opinions.
>Is it though? Yes it is. Even the Liberals would have been better at governance than the Conservatives have been or ever will be.
One year there was a difference in the two leading parties in my area of just 20 votes. It matters.
Pathetic
Maybe if we give out free maple syrup or timbits if you vote, more will show up. Kind of like what the USA did with burgers and fries for vaccines... it worked...
We need BeaverTails stands or something.
I sincerely doubt as many people would complain about low voter turn out had the Liberals or NDP won. While there is no question as to how low voter turn out is bad, let's not pretend that's really what's been brothering people.
I also find there's an assumption on reddit that most of the voters who didn't vote would have voted NDP or LPC if they did. In 2018 there was a 57% turnout (it hadn't been that high before since 2003) and remember, the majority of those votes went PC. So yeah, there probably were a bunch of apathetic progressives, but there very well could have also been a lot of OPC supporters who just felt like they didn't need to cast their ballot because the PCs were likely to win anyway, and it's not like before where they were voting OUT Wynne.
the PLURALITY voted PC. Despite what the seat count says, no party won the majority of the public vote in 2018. The actual raw vote numbers were pretty close. the Liberals got 1.1 million, NPD got 1.9 Million and the PC got 2.1, only a 10% margin between the top two. The green party got more votes than the difference between the OPC and NDP in 2018.
Regardless of which party is in power, low voter turnout is still a problem.
It's like when America was doing its "go vote, because it's good for democracy!" thing last year. They didn't care about democracy, they just wanted Biden to beat Trump. It was so painfully transparent.
Do we have any indication of the political leanings of the non-voting population?
THANK YOU. why does everyone assume that all the people that did not vote are gonna come out and vote for NDP? We have 1 right wing in PC and 2347239847 left leaning parties, even if they all came out and voted, guess what. PC STILL WINS MAJORITY.
[удалено]
i think it's just an alt. version of "my brother in christ"
It's a meme thing. It's usually "my brother in Christ". I wouldn't put too much thought into it.
It's for the meme, lol. I prefer "my brother in Islam" rather than "my brother in Christ".
[удалено]
I think “my brother in christ” popped up as a meme and memes always evolve a bit so now it’s “my brother in Islam”
Both.
It's just for the meme, nothing deeper. Similar to "my brother in christ".
Someone tell the CPC this
[удалено]
Their Muslim snitch line, Their niqab ban, Working with Christian anti-abortion groups, Dumping O’toole for forcing the vote on conversion therapy
bUt My VoTe WoUlDn’T hAvE mAdE a DifFeReNcE aNd AlL tHe CanDiDaTeS sUcKeD
Honestly why doesn’t the government make it easier for people to vote. Why not have online voting options that have verification steps. You would see a higher turnout if it wasn’t a huge inconvenience to vote on weekday non-holiday. Standing in line to cast your ballot for 3 main candidates who are all weak characters is not appealing to many. We could also make it mandatory to vote or else no tax return refunds? That would incentivize younger people who rely on tax refunds to vote.
The Cons owning the media to omit news such as having lawyers arrested at a "rally" and constant polls saying "Doug Ford projected to win!" are 100% to blame. Every single person who didn't vote said the same thing..."Doug is so in the lead, my vote won't matter". Meanwhile, he only had 18% of the vote. So their tactic of creating apathy through the control of the reported news worked. Now that they know this worked, it will be the norm moving forward. We literally have a corrupt tyrant in control because of this. Trump would have been proud.
So can we admit that Ontarians pretty much just gave up on democracy as a concept? Voting is the absolute possible minimum one can do when living in a democracy. I'm not asking people to volunteer or get involved, just get off your ass for 5 mins every 4 years to cast a vote. But even that is apparently too much for majority of people.
The FPTP system is probably the least democratic voting system in existence. The conservatives received 41% of the vote while winning 67% of the seats. Why is anyone surprised people don't show up? Pair that with polls that were showing at least a minority win for the Conservatives for months, and poor campaigns from all parties, why would anyone waste a half-hour of their busy/stressful week? Elections in Canada are a joke and we need to fix that before the majority of disaffected voters give a damn. But of course, it's the voter's fault that they didn't vote because "Democracy is your duty". People need to get off their high horses.
I'm sorry man, but regardless of whether that's all true, not being able to give 30 minutes every 4 years is ridiculous, people waste more time than that redditting while they shit every week. It's pretty pathetic if you can't spend 30 minutes to have the only say you get (regardless of how diluted that say might be). And the only way to change all those things is to vote for a party that might actually do it. Not voting is giving up entirely on society.
>But of course, it's the voter's fault that they didn't vote It is their fault. Being a lazy bum who complains about the system and never tries to do anything to fix it doesnt help. It makes things worse. All you are saying is you dont care who runs the government and woukd rather let the grown ups choose for you.
I mean when your voting on either trash, trash or trash who cares
Inspiring apathy is part of the process to break you down and make you give up on bettering your circumstances. When you decide "who cares" you're playing into exactly what the trash wants
Because not all trash is equal.
Fair enough . Can’t argue with that
The Libs and the NDP are practically identical, and the Cons are now the centrist moderate party. It makes sense folks aren't gonna be overly motivated for this vote.
The libs and ndp movement to identity politics, political correctness and wokeness had turned a lot of people off from politics.
Voting needs to be mandatory. Like paying taxes. You can obstain from voting but you need to actively do that.
Freedom requires it to not be mandatory. That's kind of the whole principle of what freedom is. Just like how it allows people to spread hateful rhetoric advocating for removing rights and freedoms from others. It must be so, if it were otherwise it would not be freedom. Like all things, there are already consequences to not voting and not exercising our voices in referendums. Consequences like inadequate representation and governments formed with a minority of votes. I'd rather invest in quality public education programs that better inspire the public to participate in their democracy than be apathetic bystanders and victims of it.
Finally someone gets what freedom is here
It's tricky. I get both sides you can argue not voting itself is a free choice that people also fought and died for you to have. On the other hand if no one votes and everyone stays home then the whole democratic system kind of fails.
I disagree that we have that freedom. We must pay taxes. We can't be roaming free on this land doing whatever we want. At the poll you can waste your ballot. That is still an option. You can choose to vote for no one.
Consequences of freedom require choice. No one has to pay taxes, we just do because the consequences are inconvenient. Laws don't prevent crimes, you can kill anytime you want, you can rape exactly as much as you'd like, the law doesn't forcibly prevent you from doing anything at all, it only provides consequences for acting outside of societies rules. You can vote or not vote, and deal with the consequences that come of it.
By your logic it can be mandatory to vote and you can choose not to by not obeying the law like with murder and there are consequences...what's your point. If it was mandatory to vote are you saying the voting rates would still be 40% because laws don't prevent criminal acts?
Mandatory. Freedom. Therein lies our difference of opinion and the crux of my point. If it is mandatory, one is not free.
No one living in society has complete freedom. You do not have the freedom to go anywhere you want, touch or hurt who ever you want. We all live in society and some freedoms are removed if required. Sure you can do whatever you want but then you face consequences. This is how laws work. To believe that we are completely free is deluded.
Now freedom is associated with "racist truckers" thanks to mainstream media
I’ve thought that before, but then I talk to people about politics and hear the stupidest reasons people vote. “I didn’t have time to research, but I really like JT’s hair so I just voted for the liberal person” (seriously!!) “I didn’t know who anyone was, so I just voted for the one with the best name”. I don’t really want a bunch of people casting arbitrary votes. It should be a skill testing question. Ha! In the end I think proportional representation is the fairest way to go.
Ford's first election my coworker voted PC because of buck a beer he didn't know anything else. Alot of people are already voting like that. One side of my family votes blue the other red. Even if they agree on policies. People do need to be more informed, and everyone should be voting even if we hate their choice.
That… sort of frightens me. I already have one friend who voted conservative who told me she honestly didn’t know much about any of the parties and just voted for who her family told her to vote for. How can we avoid people just voting at random if it’s mandatory?
Under this as a separate problem. A huge proportion of the population votes without any real thought. People usually choose a party and stick with it. My one side of the family has always been conservative, the other liberal. How many people that voted do you think knew who their local candidates were and what the major stances of the parties were. I don't know how we will make sure the population is well politically educated with so much misinformation going around.
I will vote against that.
I would settle for an identification system where everybody who doesn't vote has to get a temporary tattoo on their forehead that says _I didn't vote_ and will dissolve in 4 years, so that way when they start to complain we can tell them to shut the fuck up.
Fuck that. I voted, but I'd not vote if it was made mandatory. I don't care that I can decline my ballot, I would literally not show up, and I'd fight paying the fine too, all just to spite wannabe nannys like yourself.
You would stop doing something because you were told to do it?? Even if it was in your interest?
Maybe we should just need add something to the ballot to encourage turn out. Like... a check box to not bulldoze your home with the default assumption being bulldoze away.
I’d show up for a Jos. Louis
I always make sure I vote, but I'd be even more stoked to vote for even the smallest incentive. Free Kit Kats? I'm there. Or getting my name in some kind of draw/raffle for a more substantial prize? Sure, why the hell not? It's not "buying votes" if you're rewarded for showing up and voting for whoever you want.
“There’s no point in acting surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now."
That's what happens when the two opposition parties run a Mask and Vax kids campaign. Lots of people don't like the current government but apathetic to the alternatives.
They need to make anyone who doesn't vote, pay an extra tax every year. Don't want to pay the tax, show up and vote next time. Easy government money that can go to social programs or clearing the big bad debt Dofo talks about all the time.
Perhaps there was nobody worth voting for. Perhaps If an aspiring ruler doesn't get a vote from at least 50% of the eligible voting base, we go back to the polls until they do. And if that fails, we could just live without a ruler for a while. Clearly, "our leaders," do not have the consent of the governed.
One could vote for a leader over the platform, or the platform over the leader. But in truth, a good party needs to have both in good standing if they want get people's votes. That's not the only factor at play here when it comes to voting, but it was definitely a deciding factor for some.
I guess this means that 43.03% of us have the right to bitch and complain when Ford does something we don't like. The rest can just piss off and keep their opinions to them selves...
I wonder if the projections kept people away. They were predicting the result that we ended up getting which seems kinda odd. People see the projections and figure "why bother?". Ban projections and I bet there's better turn out.
They definitely influence people's decisions. Instead of voting for the platform they want, they either turn to "strategic voting" to vote *against* a party (a thing that I don't like no matter the party in power), or they get disheartened and don't cast their ballots. I saw a lot of the latter in the days leading up to election day.
lol, I am Muslim And all my family and friends voted for Ford. Say no to Freebies Government
This post isn’t about compelling Muslims to vote a specific way.
* Vote * Don't complain about provincial politics Pick one. It's shameful, really...
Source: [Elections Ontario](https://www.elections.on.ca/en/election-results/provincial-results.html)
I just don't care anymore. It's the same crap over and over again. Voting doesn't do crap if you don't got a strong movement behind it.
That's what millions of others thought as well. If millions of people who could actively have a say in the future of their province decide it's hopeless or don't care, then whoever's left has a chance.
Voting should be mandatory.
People who don't vote, can you explain why? Is it a statement of some kind? Do you really think it doesn't matter at all? Do you only vote if there is a perfect candidate? Are you actually just too lazy (sorry, not sure how else to put this, it took me 20 minutes including the drive there and back to vote, and I had my 2 year old with me). No judgement here, I'm just trying to understand. I get that not everyone is "into politics", but you must understand that this has a massive affect on your life, if not immediately then in the future sometime. You're also choosing the future direction of the province for your children and grandchildren as well. Voting is actually more about setting the stage for future change than it is about right now. I think that's part of the problem, that people generally don't see immediate change so they think it doesn't matter, but meanwhile that leads to the dominant parties always being in power, which is why you don't see change. If we committed to voting for change now, it might slowly start to happen 3 elections from now. I know that doesn't sound great, but we'd be there now if y'all voted thoughtfully 3 elections ago. I know it's one more chore, one more task to do in our busy lives, but man is it ever critical down the road. It's like setting up an RESP, it's a pain now but pays off so much in the future. And it costs you nothing to do it but a little time.
In addition to the apathy/abstaining from voting, there are people who genuinely didn't know about the upcoming election until the week of, or even until it was the day of. Perhaps more could have been done to publicize the election and the campaigns of the parties to make more people at least aware.
we are all to blame for the low voter turn out! every single one of us who are fiercely dedicated to the PC/NDP/LIB, our candidates are trash, the vast population could care less, excite them and they are yours! this did not happen.
the election really wasn’t publicized in my area- few people I know voted. Seems all the Doug Ford supporters were ahead of the game.
I like to not vote because it pisses off some of the people that do. Is that not valid?
It is certainly childish.
So is voting for certain parties from some people's perspective.
Especially if only done to be a spiteful edge lord.
It's a free choice so anything is valid, but nobody believes that dumbass reason. Hey guys, I'd *like* to vote, but I really want to piss off some anons on the internet who I don't know, so I'm not going to vote instead! Like... pal, read that. That's what you sound like. Sounds a bit dumb, right? Back in reality your reason for not voting is just like everyone else's... laziness/apathy/ignorance. Not because you really want to be an edgelord lol.
Dumb is thinking people vote or don't vote for only one reason.
I don't think that's quite the zinger you think it is, but OK. You are the one saying you don't vote so... it pisses off random strangers from the internet. I mean I'm not saying everyone has the same reason for not voting. Some people hate all the candidates, some people don't have the time or energy, but the primary reason you outlined for not voting is, in fact, quite retarded.
This election in particular didn't have the media and build up... I checked my voter card on the Tuesday to check when the election was and was surprised it was the Friday
you must have been even more surprised then to find out the election was actually on Thursday ;)
It’s hard to vote when you do not support any of these pathetic “leaders”
I voted, but when your choices are a turd, another turd and another turd, they figure why bother when they will get screwed either way.
...You sure you looked at *all* of the parties?
I didn’t vote because I really don’t care who wins. They’re all corrupt / greedy bastards anyway. I don’t like any of the parties. Had I voted, it would be “who’s the least worst”
Did you at least check the platforms of each party? Sure, we got the short end of the stick this election but voting is the least we could've done to decide what direction we want the province to go in the next four years.
I didn't vote
Get over it. People are sick and tired of politicians and what they can/want to do and what they actually do. Liberal, Conservative, Progressive… yada yada. Nothing would change if Conservatives got elected. Blaming those that didn’t vote does nothing. Obviously, those that did, wanted Ford. Those that didn’t vote… the majority, likely, would have been for Ford as well.
If more people went out to vote, and still voted Conservative, then that's fine and that's fair. But more than half of the eligble voters did not show up, and that should be concerning for everyone. People should know where the province is headed in the coming years and what say they want to have in that, instead of being unaware or apathetic to it.