We use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. We do this to improve browsing experience and to show (non-) personalized ads. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
The problem is that if “none of the above” wins, then what do you do?
It’s a silly notion, anyway…. If you can’t find anyone on the ballot who you want to vote for, then you just don’t vote for any of them! Simple!
The whole thing is absurd! It seems to be based on the idea that all of the candidates are the same and no good. I think the fact that this point of view is becoming more popular is what needs to be addressed….
There is already a “none of the above” option. Simply don’t vote for anyone for that particular office, while filling out the remainder of the ballot. An undervote carries with it the same message and eliminates the risk of leaving the office unelected.
Voting “none of the above” would be no different that staying on your couch in front of the TV on election day. An absolute waste of a ballot. See, here’s the thing: “none of the above” can’t take up a senate seat on your behalf. “None of the above” cannot cast a vote in congress for you.
Some might say that voting “none of the above” makes a statement. But, really, what kind of statement does it make? Someone has to be elected. If 99% of the voters voted “none of the above, the candidate that received 1% of the vote would still win the election.
In Canada, it used to be acceptable to decline your ballot. The returning officers were required to tabulate the number of declined ballots, and that number was recorded along with the final totals in the election results. But so what? So what if a significant number of people saw fit to take the trouble to go to the polling station only to decline their ballot? Yes, they made a statement, but in the end, someone was elected, and formed a government, and if you declined your ballot, effectively voting “none of the above,” you had no say in who that turned out to be.