Buttigieg Presidential Campaign

[Politesse]

You're the one demanding the Democrats do more about trans issues--but they already pushed it too far for many voters.

The germane question is “among those gor whom trans rights is a determinative factor, are there more voters who are trans rights supporters, or are there more voters who are afraid/ freaked out by trans rights?
That’s what matters at the end of the day.

I don't know what you mean, or intended to mean, by "gor" but IMHO the main thorny issue with trans rights is the right for transwomen to compete against biological women (or if you prefer, non-transwomen) in sporting events. The majority of the general public, including Democrats are opposed to it. And no, they're aren't "afraid" or "freaked out" by it. Like myself, they just want women, and especially girls, to be able to have a fighting chance of competing in a fair match.

NYT poll finds majority of Democrats oppose transgender athletes in women's sports

A recent New York Times/Ipsos survey found the vast majority of Americans, including a majority of Democrats, don't think transgender athletes should be permitted to compete in women's sports.

"Thinking about transgender female athletes — meaning athletes who were male at birth but who currently identify as female — do you think they should or should not be allowed to compete in women’s sports?" the survey asked.

Of the 2,128 people who participated, 79% said biological males who identify as women should not be allowed to participate in women's sports.

A recent example:

Trans High School Track Star Wins Triple Jump by 8 Feet

In late February, AB Hernandez, a transgender junior at Jurupa Valley High School in California, competed in the girls track and field meet securing first place in the high jump (4 feet, 10 inches), long jump (17 feet, 6 inches) and triple jump (40 feet, 0.5 inches) at the Ontario Relays. That triple jump performance was eight feet further than the runner-up.

In addition, more recently, Hernandez competed in the Roosevelt Invitational on Saturday, also securing first place in the long jump and the triple jump.

This is not the first time Hernandez has positioned herself to possibly win a title as she previously finished third in the triple jump behind two seniors at last year's outdoor track state championship meet.

Eight feet? How in the holy fuck is this even close to a fair competition?

If you believe that the law should discriminate on the basis of sex or gender, you're not a liberal - you may support freedom when it applies to you, but "liberal" means supporting freedom in general concept, not just for certain privileged classes or identities over others.

Don't feel bad, most people aren't. Right wing governments are advancing all over the world right now. Discrimination is very popular, it wins a lot of elections.

It would be nice if the world could be all things to all people, but occasionally we confront situations where we have two groups whose freedoms and rights are, more or less, mutually exclusive...at least in a practical sense. Like in the case with transwomen competing in sports with biological women. In this case, I think the concept of "The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few (or the one)" is how best to deal with it. There are a lot of other real world situations where people are denied participation due to physical issues. Short people can't ride the roller coasters, and the tallest 1% of people can't fit into the cockpit of a fighter jet, no matter how badly they want to pilot it. Not to mention rights and priveleges denied to obese people, deaf people, blind people, Downs syndrome people, etc, etc. Life isn't guaranteed to be fair.

And the Democrats, following that logic, will continue to lose elections. No sense getting mad at me for the reality of the situation, I'm one of the few Americans that actually voted for them in November. But their strategy is transparently failing them. It's clear to everyone who the Democrats are against, but clear to no one what they are FOR.

 

[Politesse]

That said, if you genuinely believe that after the "trans sports" issue has been resolved, the Republicans will not ask for anything else, having been satisifed with that wedge issue alone, I think you're a moron who doesn't know how to read. Not sorry. No, equality in sports is not the only reform these yahoos are asking for, and it won't be. Texas is mulling over a law to outright criminalize being trans, as we type. A felony, not a misdemeanor, for using any pronoun Big Brother doesn't approve of. That's not "equality in sports", that's just arresting anyone who doesn't agree with Puritan definitions of sex.

Of course they're going to go much farther. That's what happens when you aim too high and fail.

Discrimination is not a "high aim".

 

[Politesse]

Of course the LBGTQ folks voted for her. Why would they vote for a hateful person who is trying to ruin their lives?

Trump fucks over a lot of people. Blacks, Mexicans, anyone who's poor, anyone who needs medical care, anyone who has a retirement plan tied to our failing stock market, but he is making gains within all of those constituencies.

 

[Elixir]

I'm one of the few Americans that actually voted for them in November.

How does being “one of the few” square with wanting an agenda advanced?

 

[Elixir]

Trump fucks over a lot of people. Blacks, Mexicans, anyone who's poor, anyone who needs medical care, anyone who has a retirement plan tied to our failing stock market, but he is making gains within all of those constituencies

I bet any one of those categories outnumbers gay/trans rights activists. If you could just get blacks and poor people to vote with you, you could win elections.
Unfortunately both groups tend toward low information.

 

[Derec]

I dunno, man. It's fucking obvious that Harris' strategy of reaching out to conservatives and pretending not to know any socialists in order to "win back the middle" didn't work in the slightest.

Tacking to the moderte middle doesn't work so well when the candidate doing that is not credible. Kamala was one of the most left-wing US Senators and she contested the outside left lane during the 2020 primaries with Bernie and Warren. She backed cockamamie ideas such as banning all fracking and offshore drilling.
And it's not like she moved much to the middle in 2024 either. She advocated a child tax credit even more generous than in Biden's Speandapalooza.
Harris wants to give a $6,000 tax credit to parents of newborns. Here's what to know.
She proposed giveaways to first time homebuyers and to black business owners.
Harris to propose up to $25K in down-payment support for 1st-time homebuyers
Harris promises 1 million forgivable loans for Black businesses
So I reject the idea that she tried to "win back the middle" in any meaningful way either.
Yes, she reached out to the likes of Liz Cheney, but that was part of the "never Trump" tactic, not as part of any moderation on issues.

The people who think, who earnestly believe, that Kamala Harris was too left wing are not going to vote for Gavin Newsom or Gretchen Whitmer or Pete Buttigieg or Tim Walz no matter how many minorities they try to distance themselves from first.

Kamala was to the left of Biden and Biden was already to the left of Obama.
I can't fathom how people can think, can earnestly believe, that Kamala Harris was too right wing.

But do you know who did show up for Kamala on voting day? For no other reason than unfounded hope? Trans people, and other victims of the alphabet soup. I'm no mathematician, but it seems to me that if you're leaking voters like the Titanic leaked aristocracy and your only clear strategy for winning the next election is to openly reject the help of the single voting demographic that's still consistently on your side, the equation is not going to magically balance itself in 2028.

It's not about rejecting the demographic as a whole. It's about rejecting the excesses of the activist class that just ends up alienating the normies. One example was the vandalism connected to the opposition to the Public Service Training Center in Atlanta. The activists opposed to this so-called "Cop City" disproportionately identified themselves as trans or non-binary even though the issue had nothing to do with their community. And yes, this included one Manuel "Tortugita" Teran who got killed after shooting a GSP trooper in the abdomen in January 2023.

According to your link, in 2020, 27% of LGBTQABCXYZ voted for Trump. In 2024, only 12% did. A drop by more than half. And yet, in 2020 Trump lost and in 2024 he won. Large LGBT support is certainly not enough to ensure having a winning coalition.

 

[Derec]

Eight feet? How in the holy fuck is this even close to a fair competition?

It is not. The problem is that Dems had fallen into the trap of being beholden to activists for different subgroups. And often to these activists, you you are not with them, you are not just against them, but also against the entire subgroup they claim to represent.

You can see that with Politesse.
His answer to this point you raised about fairness of trans women competing with biological women in sports is to accuse you of advocating discrimination, of not being a true "liberal" and even linked your position with "right wing governments". I.e. you either support everything the activist classes demand, or you may as well be MAGA or AfD.

 

[TSwizzle]

It’s competing with women. Not “biological” women, just women.

 

[Toni]

You're the one demanding the Democrats do more about trans issues--but they already pushed it too far for many voters.

The germane question is “among those gor whom trans rights is a determinative factor, are there more voters who are trans rights supporters, or are there more voters who are afraid/ freaked out by trans rights?
That’s what matters at the end of the day.

I don't know what you mean, or intended to mean, by "gor" but IMHO the main thorny issue with trans rights is the right for transwomen to compete against biological women (or if you prefer, non-transwomen) in sporting events. The majority of the general public, including Democrats are opposed to it. And no, they're aren't "afraid" or "freaked out" by it. Like myself, they just want women, and especially girls, to be able to have a fighting chance of competing in a fair match.

NYT poll finds majority of Democrats oppose transgender athletes in women's sports

A recent New York Times/Ipsos survey found the vast majority of Americans, including a majority of Democrats, don't think transgender athletes should be permitted to compete in women's sports.

"Thinking about transgender female athletes — meaning athletes who were male at birth but who currently identify as female — do you think they should or should not be allowed to compete in women’s sports?" the survey asked.

Of the 2,128 people who participated, 79% said biological males who identify as women should not be allowed to participate in women's sports.

A recent example:

Trans High School Track Star Wins Triple Jump by 8 Feet

In late February, AB Hernandez, a transgender junior at Jurupa Valley High School in California, competed in the girls track and field meet securing first place in the high jump (4 feet, 10 inches), long jump (17 feet, 6 inches) and triple jump (40 feet, 0.5 inches) at the Ontario Relays. That triple jump performance was eight feet further than the runner-up.

In addition, more recently, Hernandez competed in the Roosevelt Invitational on Saturday, also securing first place in the long jump and the triple jump.

This is not the first time Hernandez has positioned herself to possibly win a title as she previously finished third in the triple jump behind two seniors at last year's outdoor track state championship meet.

Eight feet? How in the holy fuck is this even close to a fair competition?

If you believe that the law should discriminate on the basis of sex or gender, you're not a liberal - you may support freedom when it applies to you, but "liberal" means supporting freedom in general concept, not just for certain privileged classes or identities over others..

Don't feel bad, most people aren't. Right wing governments are advancing all over the world right now. Discrimination is very popular, it wins a lot of elections.

It would be nice if the world could be all things to all people, but occasionally we confront situations where we have two groups whose freedoms and rights are, more or less, mutually exclusive...at least in a practical sense. Like in the case with transwomen competing in sports with biological women. In this case, I think the concept of "The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few (or the one)" is how best to deal with it. There are a lot of other real world situations where people are denied participation due to physical issues. Short people can't ride the roller coasters, and the tallest 1% of people can't fit into the cockpit of a fighter jet, no matter how badly they want to pilot it. Not to mention rights and priveleges denied to obese people, deaf people, blind people, Downs syndrome people, etc, etc. Life isn't guaranteed to be fair.

And the Democrats, following that logic, will continue to lose elections. No sense getting mad at me for the reality of the situation, I'm one of the few Americans that actually voted for them in November. But their strategy is transparently failing them. It's clear to everyone who the Democrats are against, but clear to no one what they are FOR.

What you mean is that you were among the more than 71 million Americans who voted for the Democratic party candidates in 2024. That's not a few

Me, too.

I am as disgusted, angry and heartbroken as anyone else but please do not make the mistake that only a select few saw the truth and voted for the better candidates. You are less alone than you think you are. If we don't all start pulling together we are lost. We need to recognize that we are not alone.

 

[laughing dog]

“How are democrats “openly rejecting the help of the trans people”?

What, in specific terms, do you feel feel Democrats should "back off on" in terms of trans rights?

"We still want your votes, we just won't lift a finger to stop it when people propose legislation explicitly designed to harm you, anymore" is not support, it's exploitation.

I agree. For many people, they are much more interested in issues that directly affect their lives, and transgender issues is not on their radar. The Democrats are basically portraying themselves as the least bad option for people like you. You appear to be arguing it isn't going to work well enough for them. You have a point since it didn't work with women and racial minorities in the last POTUS race.

 

[thebeave]

Eight feet? How in the holy fuck is this even close to a fair competition?

It is not. The problem is that Dems had fallen into the trap of being beholden to activists for different subgroups. And often to these activists, you you are not with them, you are not just against them, but also against the entire subgroup they claim to represent.

You can see that with Politesse.
His answer to this point you raised about fairness of trans women competing with biological women in sports is to accuse you of advocating discrimination, of not being a true "liberal" and even linked your position with "right wing governments". I.e. you either support everything the activist classes demand, or you may as well be MAGA or AfD.

Yeah, the disparity between the trans guy and the girls in the sporting events is just absurd. Its like Kramer sparring with kids in Karate class, only this is for real:



I'm used to Politesse saying such ridiculous things, so much so that its become very tedious and not worth spending calories responding to it. From what I've seen, he seems to do it to most everyone else at some point or another, so I don't take it personally. I wish he would move on from that schtick though. Its rather undignified behavior for a college professor, of all people.

 

[Politesse]

You're the one demanding the Democrats do more about trans issues--but they already pushed it too far for many voters.

The germane question is “among those gor whom trans rights is a determinative factor, are there more voters who are trans rights supporters, or are there more voters who are afraid/ freaked out by trans rights?
That’s what matters at the end of the day.

I don't know what you mean, or intended to mean, by "gor" but IMHO the main thorny issue with trans rights is the right for transwomen to compete against biological women (or if you prefer, non-transwomen) in sporting events. The majority of the general public, including Democrats are opposed to it. And no, they're aren't "afraid" or "freaked out" by it. Like myself, they just want women, and especially girls, to be able to have a fighting chance of competing in a fair match.

NYT poll finds majority of Democrats oppose transgender athletes in women's sports

A recent New York Times/Ipsos survey found the vast majority of Americans, including a majority of Democrats, don't think transgender athletes should be permitted to compete in women's sports.

"Thinking about transgender female athletes — meaning athletes who were male at birth but who currently identify as female — do you think they should or should not be allowed to compete in women’s sports?" the survey asked.

Of the 2,128 people who participated, 79% said biological males who identify as women should not be allowed to participate in women's sports.

A recent example:

Trans High School Track Star Wins Triple Jump by 8 Feet

In late February, AB Hernandez, a transgender junior at Jurupa Valley High School in California, competed in the girls track and field meet securing first place in the high jump (4 feet, 10 inches), long jump (17 feet, 6 inches) and triple jump (40 feet, 0.5 inches) at the Ontario Relays. That triple jump performance was eight feet further than the runner-up.

In addition, more recently, Hernandez competed in the Roosevelt Invitational on Saturday, also securing first place in the long jump and the triple jump.

This is not the first time Hernandez has positioned herself to possibly win a title as she previously finished third in the triple jump behind two seniors at last year's outdoor track state championship meet.

Eight feet? How in the holy fuck is this even close to a fair competition?

If you believe that the law should discriminate on the basis of sex or gender, you're not a liberal - you may support freedom when it applies to you, but "liberal" means supporting freedom in general concept, not just for certain privileged classes or identities over others..

Don't feel bad, most people aren't. Right wing governments are advancing all over the world right now. Discrimination is very popular, it wins a lot of elections.

It would be nice if the world could be all things to all people, but occasionally we confront situations where we have two groups whose freedoms and rights are, more or less, mutually exclusive...at least in a practical sense. Like in the case with transwomen competing in sports with biological women. In this case, I think the concept of "The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few (or the one)" is how best to deal with it. There are a lot of other real world situations where people are denied participation due to physical issues. Short people can't ride the roller coasters, and the tallest 1% of people can't fit into the cockpit of a fighter jet, no matter how badly they want to pilot it. Not to mention rights and priveleges denied to obese people, deaf people, blind people, Downs syndrome people, etc, etc. Life isn't guaranteed to be fair.

And the Democrats, following that logic, will continue to lose elections. No sense getting mad at me for the reality of the situation, I'm one of the few Americans that actually voted for them in November. But their strategy is transparently failing them. It's clear to everyone who the Democrats are against, but clear to no one what they are FOR.

What you mean is that you were among the more than 71 million Americans who voted for the Democratic party candidates in 2024. That's not a few

Me, too.

I am as disgusted, angry and heartbroken as anyone else but please do not make the mistake that only a select few saw the truth and voted for the better candidates. You are less alone than you think you are. If we don't all start pulling together we are lost. We need to recognize that we are not alone.

The "woo the center-right" strategy is failing and is continuing to fail. The Democrats don't just need to court gay votes, though throwing away our support is stupid. What they should be doing, with all of the constituencies from which they have long drawn support, is rebuild the relationships they have broken with their apathy and stupidity, and give people a reason to believe that they have something to gain from voting Democrat, not just something to lose if they don't.

 

[Politesse]

You can see that with Politesse.
His answer to this point you raised about fairness of trans women competing with biological women in sports is to accuse you of advocating discrimination, of not being a true "liberal" and even linked your position with "right wing governments".

Excuse me? I "accused" no one of anything. But what has been proposed is a matter of policy, not opinion, and its effects would be concrete. There is no way to enforce anti-trans laws without either discriminating on the basis of sex, or subjecting all citizens equally to invasive laws that most citizens would and should reject. The government has no right to any special knowledge about your DNA, your medical history, visual inspection of your genitals, or any other test by which your biological sex could be proven in any case where its assumptions were tested. You should not be so quick to volunteer to give up those rights to privacy and freedom of choice which you as a citizen have enjoyed woth little interruption until now.

But even if you think I'm wrong, it doesn't change the fact that either way, siding with the Republicans on the anti-trans issue will be seen as discriminatory by trans people themselves, and eat away at the already dwindling Democratic vote. Which will not alarm you all that much, but should be more concerning than it is to those still loyal to this country, its Constitution, and its core values. Which until eight years ago did not include "fairness in recreational contests", but has always included personal liberty, and since 1868 has included "equal protection under the law" for all US citizens.

 

[Politesse]

I am as disgusted, angry and heartbroken as anyone else but please do not make the mistake that only a select few saw the truth and voted for the better candidates. You are less alone than you think you are. If we don't all start pulling together we are lost. We need to recognize that we are not alone.

With this, I agree. But trying to "tone down" on supposedly Woke issues and "reach across the aisle" to undisguised fascists is not going to make any of us "DEIs" feel any less alone. Most of us are wondering if the 1960s are about to be rebooted altogether, and our alliances will need to be made hand in hand in the streets rather than in the halls of Congress. That would not be a good situation, but it might be the only plausible situation.

This will not be good news for the Democrats, if so. If the Civil Rights Acts go down altogether, the sunset careers of the likes of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are going down with them, and their legacies will mean nothing but vague embarrassment to their descendants. Don't believe propagandistic histories: those who won you your civil rights did not do so because desegregation, gender equity, labor organization, or gay rights were popular in election years. Middle class whites were always skittish and paranoid about all of the above. They were not generally popular ideas, and I am fully aware that they still are not, with most. To advocate for those rights anyway takes true leadership, rhetorical prowess, and integrity, not just market-style research into voting trends.

 

[Politesse]

Trump fucks over a lot of people. Blacks, Mexicans, anyone who's poor, anyone who needs medical care, anyone who has a retirement plan tied to our failing stock market, but he is making gains within all of those constituencies

I bet any one of those categories outnumbers gay/trans rights activists. If you could just get blacks and poor people to vote with you, you could win elections.
Unfortunately both groups tend toward low information.

I guess I should not be shocked that you would write something like that, but I am all the same. You really think Blacks are going to march with you when you don't even disguise that you think they're all by virtue of the color of their skin, or the poor by virtue of the contents of their wallet, "low-information voters", AKA ignorant? Some "alliance"!

 

[WAB]

Yes, that comment was in poor taste.

 

[Toni]

You're the one demanding the Democrats do more about trans issues--but they already pushed it too far for many voters.

The germane question is “among those gor whom trans rights is a determinative factor, are there more voters who are trans rights supporters, or are there more voters who are afraid/ freaked out by trans rights?
That’s what matters at the end of the day.

I don't know what you mean, or intended to mean, by "gor" but IMHO the main thorny issue with trans rights is the right for transwomen to compete against biological women (or if you prefer, non-transwomen) in sporting events. The majority of the general public, including Democrats are opposed to it. And no, they're aren't "afraid" or "freaked out" by it. Like myself, they just want women, and especially girls, to be able to have a fighting chance of competing in a fair match.

NYT poll finds majority of Democrats oppose transgender athletes in women's sports

A recent New York Times/Ipsos survey found the vast majority of Americans, including a majority of Democrats, don't think transgender athletes should be permitted to compete in women's sports.

"Thinking about transgender female athletes — meaning athletes who were male at birth but who currently identify as female — do you think they should or should not be allowed to compete in women’s sports?" the survey asked.

Of the 2,128 people who participated, 79% said biological males who identify as women should not be allowed to participate in women's sports.

A recent example:

Trans High School Track Star Wins Triple Jump by 8 Feet

In late February, AB Hernandez, a transgender junior at Jurupa Valley High School in California, competed in the girls track and field meet securing first place in the high jump (4 feet, 10 inches), long jump (17 feet, 6 inches) and triple jump (40 feet, 0.5 inches) at the Ontario Relays. That triple jump performance was eight feet further than the runner-up.

In addition, more recently, Hernandez competed in the Roosevelt Invitational on Saturday, also securing first place in the long jump and the triple jump.

This is not the first time Hernandez has positioned herself to possibly win a title as she previously finished third in the triple jump behind two seniors at last year's outdoor track state championship meet.

Eight feet? How in the holy fuck is this even close to a fair competition?

If you believe that the law should discriminate on the basis of sex or gender, you're not a liberal - you may support freedom when it applies to you, but "liberal" means supporting freedom in general concept, not just for certain privileged classes or identities over others..

Don't feel bad, most people aren't. Right wing governments are advancing all over the world right now. Discrimination is very popular, it wins a lot of elections.

It would be nice if the world could be all things to all people, but occasionally we confront situations where we have two groups whose freedoms and rights are, more or less, mutually exclusive...at least in a practical sense. Like in the case with transwomen competing in sports with biological women. In this case, I think the concept of "The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few (or the one)" is how best to deal with it. There are a lot of other real world situations where people are denied participation due to physical issues. Short people can't ride the roller coasters, and the tallest 1% of people can't fit into the cockpit of a fighter jet, no matter how badly they want to pilot it. Not to mention rights and priveleges denied to obese people, deaf people, blind people, Downs syndrome people, etc, etc. Life isn't guaranteed to be fair.

And the Democrats, following that logic, will continue to lose elections. No sense getting mad at me for the reality of the situation, I'm one of the few Americans that actually voted for them in November. But their strategy is transparently failing them. It's clear to everyone who the Democrats are against, but clear to no one what they are FOR.

What you mean is that you were among the more than 71 million Americans who voted for the Democratic party candidates in 2024. That's not a few

Me, too.

I am as disgusted, angry and heartbroken as anyone else but please do not make the mistake that only a select few saw the truth and voted for the better candidates. You are less alone than you think you are. If we don't all start pulling together we are lost. We need to recognize that we are not alone.

The "woo the center-right" strategy is failing and is continuing to fail. The Democrats don't just need to court gay votes, though throwing away our support is stupid. What they should be doing, with all of the constituencies from which they have long drawn support, is rebuild the relationships they have broken with their apathy and stupidity, and give people a reason to believe that they have something to gain from voting Democrat, not just something to lose if they don't.

Apathy? I don’t think so. If you are thinking about apathy, talk to the voters who stayed home.

Side note; I am still fuming that the party listened to know nothing celebrities and forced Biden out. I have nothing against Harris but surely we should have learned something from the Trump-Hillary match up, Trump wakes up the racism, xenophobia, homophobia and sexism that lingers in certain pockets of the population and amplifies it. That’s why Biden ran in 2020.

A certain segment of the population just feels safer with a white man in charge.

 

[bilby]

Politics is far more about picking the least bad rather than actually getting great.

Not so.

It's about vetoing the worst.

All non dictatorial systems are about ways to get rid of bad rulers. Ideally (but not always) before they reach office, while avoiding the difficulty of assasination, and/or the expense of open warfare.

It's not a week, it's only seven days!

The distinction is important.

How many times do you hear "I didn't/won't bother voting, because I don't like any of the candidates"?

How many times do you hear "I had/have got to make sure that I vote, because I don't like any of the candidates, and some are clearly even worse than the rest"?

The former is the disastrous result of your spin; The latter would be much better, but is vanishingly rare, because your spin is the dominant one.

Of course, best of all would be "I am going to run for office myself, because these other candidates are all awful".

Picking the least bad is the same as vetoing the worst.

You are literally replying to an explanation of why that is not the case.

Do you have a rebuttal? Do you understand what I wrote? Did you even read it?

 

[Elixir]

How many times do you hear "I didn't/won't bother voting, because I don't like any of the candidates"?

I believe that almost always is meant to say “I’m going to express my displeasure with these bad choices.”
It’s a bit of idiocy, meant to excuse laziness IMO.
Do they actually believe that somewhere, someone is going to hear their expression of displeasure? If they think that, maybe it’s best that they don’t vote.
Their vote is NOT a political placard. It is a tool, meant to factor their opinion into future choices. Certainly if our candidate wins we feel good about it. But even in a loss, the closeness (or not) weighs into future decisions. Not casting a vote is NOT “a vote for none of the above”, it’s an abdication of responsibility.
If we required eligible voters to vote, making them write in “none of the above” if that was really their intent, I’d bet that 99+ percent of the no-votes would vote for one of the candidates on the ticket.

 

[bilby]

If we required eligible voters to vote, making them write in “none of the above” if that was really their intent, I’d bet that 99+ percent of the no-votes would vote for one of the candidates on the ticket.

Over here, we do - attendance is mandatory (though the only penalty for non attendance is a small fine). Turnout is consequently high (typically around 95%), and while nobody is required to correctly complete a ballot, the number of blank or defaced ballots is typically only a couple of percent.

Most of those who fail to attend appear to be forgetful, rather than protesting; Most spolied or incomplete ballots appear to be due to incompetence rather than a deliberate intent not to vote, though there are always a tiny number of genuine protests (I recall seeing a paper that had "not everyone should have to vote" scrawled across it, with none of the boxes marked; As the Returning Officer said when he saw it, "Well, he didn't, did he?").