Australia up next: Federal election tomorrow

[EricHiggin]

Pemalite said:

There is actually a small loophole in the law... It's only compulsory to vote if you register to vote.

I didn't start voting until I hit the young age of 30... However having matured somewhat (Hint: Big ask for a firefighter), decided to add my opinion and morals to help guide the country in a direction I believe it should go in.
In saying that, once I registered to vote, I have to vote every election.

Compulsory voting does have some advantages, there isn't wasted resources trying to "encourage" people to have a democracy sausage and vote, more effort can be placed on the issues at hand.
And because it's compulsory, small excuses like "work" isn't really applicable, so most people get some time off work.

There is also the advantage of having one less excuse of why a political party won/lost, so a lot less whinging and moaning.

But then you can no longer pick and choose when it makes sense for you to vote and when it doesn't. You're still stuck with no voting or only voting.

Compulsory may compel Aussies to pay attention, but it won't do much for Canucks, and definitely won't for Murica.

The whining and moaning here would just be transferred to why some have to wait to vote for nothing in the heat or cold.

Pemalite said:

By legal definition here... An Adult is someone who is 18 years of age or older, that means.. They can drink and go to clubs and pubs, drive cars and trucks, join the army, fire or ambulance service and deal with deceased casualties... I think if we are going to legally allow them to do all those things, they should be legally allowed to vote to help guide theirs and the nations future.

That said, not all 18 year old are unwise, just like how many 50 year olds are factually stupid and lack wisdom. - It's a case by case basis.

The only real appropriate way to "weed out" poor voting is to have an I.Q test and bring in strict laws to curb misinformation during political campaigns.
I.E. There SHOULD be legal repercussions when a candidate says something stupid like "Stopping a war in 24 hours" when everyone knows it's logistically impossible.

I don't personally agree with a lot of things. 18 is a bit young to drink, but then again, pre teens can get sex changes, so should they be able to vote? If they should have to wait until they're 18 or older, how many other min ages should be moved higher perhaps, like voting? If 21 used to be the min age way back let's say, then why let 18 year olds vote today, since we all know they're less mature, responsible, competent, etc, vs an 18 year old a century ago, let alone a 21 year old back then.

I think basic cognitive tests should be used to weed out anyone who's 'lost it', like very old people, and IQ tests certainly aren't a bad idea, assuming the min level still allows the majority to vote.

I also agree there should be repercussions for blatant lies from politicians, but how to deal with that exactly isn't clear, because how do you enforce that legally? If your opposition blocks you or undermines you, etc, from stopping a war, are you still at fault? If you're not part of the war directly, and one of the involved Countries leadership purposely avoids your negotiations, should you pay a price? There's far too many ways in which this could be used politically to hurt or ruin a politician, so best case you might be able to go after the few most small, miniscule lies, but would that really make a difference and be worth it?