"None Of The Above" (NOTA) votes
Now that I have your attention. This is about the voter consent law or
choosing NONE OF THE ABOVE. Very important information for people who really want changes in American government...
What choosing NOTA does:
aside from the Democrats being forced to find someone other than John Kerry, it would also force the Republican Party to elect a newer candidate, blahblahblah, George Bush could not run for office either.
This law was first enacted by Nevada in 1976 and currently is being used in two other states. The need for this law in Federal elections is due to the fact that any legitimate vote requires the ability to withhold consent, and the legitimate consent of voters should allow everyone to not elect the only choices available as well as to force new political choices.
[Moderator Edit - Cogitation] "Pictures of John Kerry beating his wife!" is NOT descriptive of the topic content. [/modedit]
Anarchy 92
10-10-2004, 02:49
Snooze good god your boring.
LOL if you find politics boring, what are you doing here?
Snowboarding Maniacs
10-10-2004, 02:51
The only way voting "none of the above" would have any effectiveness would be if EVERYONE in the country voted it.
Sdaeriji
10-10-2004, 02:53
Correct me if I am misunderstanding this, but the only way for that theoretically to work would be if more people voted NOTA than people voted for either candidate, right?
New Foxxinnia
10-10-2004, 02:56
You fucking liar.
It doesn't take EVERY VOTE for this to work,
it takes MOST OF THE VOTES for it to work.
Currently there are Republican voters who will not vote for George Bush because they do not want him in office either, so they either do not vote or they vote for the other guy.
On the flip side... some Democratic voters do not neccessarily want John Kerry in office, but they do want George Bush out... but to do so they must vote for Kerry.
This isn't a legitimate choice.
It is also the largest key reason behind the cause of Americans NOT VOTING. I would imagine that if the millions of non-voters had this option to choose from, everybody would vote.
Roachsylvania
10-10-2004, 03:06
You fucking liar.
Care to elaborate? I'm not saying he isn't (I have no idea), but if you're going to make such an accusation then you should back it up with something.
You fucking liar.
http://www.got2haveit.com/Pictures/countchocula.jpg
Gigatron
10-10-2004, 03:09
Having this option in German elections would be welcome aswell. I'm all for it.
Sdaeriji
10-10-2004, 03:10
What results if there is a NOTA majority? Does the sitting president remain until a candidate is elected? We could theoretically go indefinitely with the same president.
New Foxxinnia
10-10-2004, 03:12
Care to elaborate? I'm not saying he isn't (I have no idea), but if you're going to make such an accusation then you should back it up with something.The title of the thread is, " Pictures of John Kerry beating his wife!". While the post has nothing to fucking do with it. Therefore, he is fucking lying.
That theory is already in practice with 3 states and has been since 1976.
VOTE KERRY
http://www.letsgetwacky.com/wobblers/chocula/ChoculaToon.gif
waaah you're a liar wahh
You know, there's probably a small percentage of anti-Kerry voters who would be more inclined to vote for him if he did beat THK.
:eek:
Cogitation
10-10-2004, 03:25
J0eg0d: Do not create topics with deliberately misleading titles.
You fucking liar.
You wanna quit flaming?
--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
New Foxxinnia
10-10-2004, 03:28
You wanna quit flaming?
--The Modified Democratic States of CogitationFor the record he was lying.
For the record; MOST TITLES ARE MISLEADING
Next thing you know you'll put a PG13 on my posts.
Quit being a Democrat.
http://conservativecrust.com/archives/shirt.jpg