why did so many not bother to vote in ontario election ?
ryan29 @ Sat Oct 13, 2007 9:08 am
BluesBud BluesBud:
As someone opening this topic to read the opinions on the Header, (unlike those posting) I have to ask. Is this thread about the aftermath of the Ont. election anymore? Or is this a thread on freedom of speech? If it has shifted please kindly open an other thread.
As I said, this has the potential to be a good point for a forum on the important issue of voter apathy. Instead it is being altered to a steady stream of BS.
As I said, this has the potential to be a good point for a forum on the important issue of voter apathy. Instead it is being altered to a steady stream of BS.
well i started the thread out of a hope of trying to understand why so many people didn't even bother to vote in our recent provincial election .
the voter turnout was one of the lowest in recent history and all parties lost votes it seemed.
it was a rather sad day for our democracy i think considering so many voters now think there is no point in even voting anymore.
Arctic_Menace @ Sat Oct 13, 2007 12:52 pm
$1:
well i started the thread out of a hope of trying to understand why so many people didn't even bother to vote in our recent provincial election .
Because everyone knew the Liberals were heading for a majority. Also, politics doesn't interest too many people who have busy and hectic lives.
ryan29 @ Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:44 pm
Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
$1:
well i started the thread out of a hope of trying to understand why so many people didn't even bother to vote in our recent provincial election .
Because everyone knew the Liberals were heading for a majority. Also, politics doesn't interest too many people who have busy and hectic lives.
but the stuiped thing is if more people had bothered to come out and vote for the opposition parties in some ridings there would of been a much smaller liberal government as they won some seats by so little .
i can't believe so many didn't even bother to vote , it turned the election into a waste of time as almost all incumbents got back in of all parties it seemed.
the election would of turned out differently if more voters had shown up i think , as higher turnout usually doesn't help incumbents.
Mustang1 @ Sat Oct 13, 2007 2:48 pm
RUEZ RUEZ:
Mustang1 Mustang1:
RUEZ RUEZ:
Mustang1 Mustang1:
RUEZ RUEZ:
Mustang1 Mustang1:
RUEZ RUEZ:
I imagine people just aren't happy with either choice.
Huh? What choice? Come on, I know politics is difficult for you, but at least show up with something of substance.
Oh...and how on earth did you arrive at this "learned" opinion?
Then "ignore" me. I asked a simple question, but evidently I intimidate you too much. So much in fact, that in typical RUEZ suck fashion, you're now threatening with mod action (again, weren't you the guy championing freedom of speech and anti-censorship?).
This is nothing more than an act of an intellectual coward - i'm on topic...if you don't like the adversarial nature of politics, then stay out of the threads (and DON'T start fights that you can't finish).
I feel sorry for you. Bullies like you don't intimidate me.You started this, projection boy. Each and every time you try and start a pissing match with me, you'll be the one getting wet. You're nothing and if you think i'll stand by and let you take runs at me, you're sorely mistaken.
Again, for anyone keeping score, I tried to ask a salient question about the election and all i receive is dimestore psychology from the uneducated. Pathetic.
Easy solution - don't start with attacks on me. Each and every time i'll hit you back harder. Sorry, don't write intellectual cheques your meager intellect can't cash. And get some pride as this schoolyard crying to the mods is both hypocritical (remember your anti-censorship whining?) and juvenile
Mustang1 @ Sat Oct 13, 2007 2:51 pm
Dayseed Dayseed:
Yes, your own admissions that you're going to report this post, that post and then, in rather stunningly stupid fashion, your own posts. That's being worse than Pig-Vomit on the dump-button.
You're all about the censorship now. It's sad. Do you have any feelings about your recent change of heart over censorship that you want to share? Because I want to hear it RUEZ, if only to help you heal.
You're all about the censorship now. It's sad. Do you have any feelings about your recent change of heart over censorship that you want to share? Because I want to hear it RUEZ, if only to help you heal.
Wait a sec - he's not actually denying his "anti-censorship" libertarian quote is he? Nice. He starts fights and minute he inevitably gets his ass handed to him, he whines for the mods.
A warning to all about this guy's chicken crap tactics is in order
Arctic_Menace @ Sat Oct 13, 2007 6:51 pm
$1:
but the stuiped thing is if more people had bothered to come out and vote for the opposition parties in some ridings there would of been a much smaller liberal government as they won some seats by so little .
Uh, no. Even if more people showed up, Dalton would still have a solid majority. John Tory's fuck ups meant that he was going to lsoe no matter what. Why you just assume that the people who didn't vote would've voted PC? Where is your proof of that?
Arctic_Menace @ Sat Oct 13, 2007 6:52 pm
$1:
the election would of turned out differently if more voters had shown up i think , as higher turnout usually doesn't help incumbents.
Where are you getting that statistic?
neopundit @ Sat Oct 13, 2007 8:05 pm
Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
$1:
the election would of turned out differently if more voters had shown up i think , as higher turnout usually doesn't help incumbents.
Where are you getting that statistic?
I think he's just royally fucked up cause and effect.
You can safely assume that when an incumbent gets 'voted out', the turnout will be higher. This makes sense, because people get more politically active when they want change. They get out and vote.
But to think that the turnout was a cause of the incumbents loss rather than an effect of the incumbents popularity is, I believe, wrong.
Dayseed @ Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:33 am
Arctic,
Sorry to disappoint, but Ryan just sort of invents stats, reasons and causes when they suit him, but he'll be damned if he's going to let contrary posted ones past him without scrutiny.
At first blush, I thought perhaps what was before me in Ryan was an Ontario political enthusiast, but he instead turned out to be an ignorant pleb uneducated hack partisan of the worst stripe.
Any reason for the Tories loss in the election will suffice for him, provided that reason has nothing to do with the Conservative party.
Otherwise, it's like Randy taking off his pants: Look the fuck out.
Chumley @ Fri Oct 19, 2007 5:14 am
The recent Edmonton election had only a 25% turnout.
Saskanna @ Sat Oct 20, 2007 10:09 am
BluesBud BluesBud:
As someone opening this topic to read the opinions on the Header, (unlike those posting) I have to ask. Is this thread about the aftermath of the Ont. election anymore? Or is this a thread on freedom of speech? If it has shifted please kindly open an other thread.
As I said, this has the potential to be a good point for a forum on the important issue of voter apathy. Instead it is being altered to a steady stream of BS.
As I said, this has the potential to be a good point for a forum on the important issue of voter apathy. Instead it is being altered to a steady stream of BS.
Agreed. And I had some comments I WAS going to make until the flame war started. Unfortunate because I just recommended these Forums to someone and I'm hoping they don't find this thread right off the top.
Saskanna @ Sat Oct 20, 2007 10:13 am
I heard radio reports that in some ridings in Ontario there was less than a 40% turnout. That's truly pathetic. This system just isn't working with that kind of voter turnout.
What's the solution? WE live with these kinds of numbers in Municipal elections but to have this kind of turnout in a Provincial Electon in a Province like Ontario is extremely troubling.
themasta @ Sat Oct 20, 2007 10:21 am
Chumley Chumley:
The recent Edmonton election had only a 25% turnout.
That was most likely due to our media. If you read any of the papers, or watched any of the news, the media had declared Mandel a winner before the candidates had even begun campaigning. Surprise, he won in a landslide. Not only that, but everywhere you saw something about how incumbents usually win back their seats, surprise, they all did, with one mighty exception. The ousting of Nickel in favour of Don Iveson shows that when motivated for change, people can and often do make a difference. The onus is not just on the electorate, but the candidates as well, if your campaign looks like it is being lead by a 7 year-old, why the hell should I get interested and vote for you? You don't care enough to run a solid campaign so why should I care to vote? Don Iveson's juggernaut campaign shows that with a little work, you can galvanize people and get the votes you need to make a difference. If we want to decrease voter apathy, it's not going to come from our end, but the candidates. Run an interesting campaign, don't fucking phone it in, and who knows, you might see the numbers go up.
techedude @ Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:42 pm
As for me, I was busy that day. Sometimes work just gets in the way.