Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Haha you get funnier by the day!

I'm trying to follow your logic here KM I really am. So the party that gets the most votes shouldn't actually get to govern? 

Are you suggesting that all the people that didn't vote should decide who runs the country?

Help me out here as I'm sure you have a solution to the obvious challenges this system would face...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

ahhh NZ, what a breath of fresh air !!  With so much of the rest of the world being dictated too by aggressive , power obsessed, stupid old men.... So called leaders whose main interest is s

Well, while that may well be (appears to be) what he means, society has previously decided those under 18 are not sufficiently mature to make these decisions, the mentally deficient are not up to it,

I'm 65 at my next birthday and this looks like being the first time I voted for a winner.

On 23/10/2020 at 5:44 AM, It Got said:

Fancy that,

23% of NZers voted for Jacinda

21% of Americans voted for Trump

 

 

Based on the 2016 us population of 323.1 million (google) and trump winning 62,984,828 votes (Wikipedia), that = 19.49%

Hillary got 20.38%

 

Jacinda only got some 23000 votes. Labour got 1,171,544

nz pop 4834916 on 25 Oct according to a UN calculation. (labour 24.2%)

Nz stats said we were 5002100 at end or March 2020. (Labour 23.42%.
 

nats got considerably less

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, DrWatson said:

Labour got 1,171,544

nz pop 4834916 on 25 Oct according to a UN calculation. (labour 24.2%)


 

 

 

 

But not everyone can vote. There is only about 3.5 million or so on the electoral roll and of those about 2.9 million voted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ahhh NZ,

what a breath of fresh air !! 

With so much of the rest of the world being dictated too by aggressive , power obsessed, stupid old men.... So called leaders whose main interest is self interest. That "govern" by what a few "friends" may lose rather than what the world needs to gain. That argue that " a market driven world is , the most efficient  and fair system"... and at the same time refuse to cost environmental degradation into the market......  AND patently are so dumb ...that they cant see that this planet is a fragile closed system. Thats not even politics...thats the most basic of science. 

These dumb old men still need to build "pyramids" ... still need to try and dominate the globe at the expense of all others.. 

.. ahh yes what an oh so small, but nice breath of fresh air.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/10/2020 at 2:35 AM, Sabre said:

Silly me what was I thinking.

Apparently IG, the antagonist formerly known as KM, also thinks the voice of the non-voters should somehow be taken into account...p

I don't think that's what KM is saying at all. 

KM is saying (maybe I'm wrong) that there is is some inherent unfairness when quite a large minority of the population are not able to vote - the mentally infirm, those under 18 etc., those serving long prison sentences.

The government must govern for the benefit of those people as well, and remember that it was a majority of people who voted, and not a majority of the population, who put them there.

The only voices who "don't count" are essentially the 15% of registered voters who simply opted out (these are the non-voters and they're distinctly different from the can't voters). But even then we must be careful that we don't assume the reason they didn't vote is simply that they couldn't be arsed. Many other reasons are possible (sick, car broke down and couldn't get to the polling station, had to take a kid to hospital etc.)

A major downfall of democracy is the public's understanding of what democracy is. Real democracy is not "majority rule" - that's mobocracy. And even if you were able to secure so many votes in an election that it represents >51% of the whole population, it doesn't give the government the moral or democratic authority to put the other <49% to the sword, neither metaphorically nor literally.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, while that may well be (appears to be) what he means, society has previously decided those under 18 are not sufficiently mature to make these decisions, the mentally deficient are not up to it, and those who are serving long prison sentences have shown that they make poor decisions, and it is not in the best interests of society as a whole to allow these people to vote, either temporarily or permanently.

If someone does not like these decisions, then they should use the system to have them changed - ie vote.

No country in the world allows every person to vote.

The only people that matter in an election are eligible voters.

The decisions that are made will certainly effect ineligible voters, and hopefully our systems will make reasonable decisions. I know in some cases this is not really what happens. There is no perfect system that I'm aware of. NZ is a pretty good place to live compared to the rest of the world. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Island Time said:

The only people that matter in an election are eligible voters.

"eligible voters" are regularly redefined to suit, but yes, true, in an election it's the voters who matter.. However, elections lasts but a day, and governments last longer.  In governance, it's the people, not just the voters who matter. 

By ignoring the people, governments very quickly become dictatorships. Everyone has a right to demonstrate - including all those deemed "unsuitable" to act as electors.

In revolutions, it's not only the voters who rampage.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DrWatson said:

In revolutions, it's not only the voters who rampage.

True, but in countries like NZ, the vast majority of Adults are eligible voters. Governments that fail to understand, and act in the best interests of their people, can, and should be overthrown.

There are small radical groups both left, right, and looney, in most countries. But there is mostly not enough of them to make any sort of legitimate threat to any properly elected government. However, it seems that with the modern trend towards sensationalist media, and a say anything to get coverage attitude, some of the fringes get way more attention than they should. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...