I am not saying that none of the candidates gathered the 207 electorate votes. I am just stating that a majority of the US citizens vote blank. Will the majority rule?
Are you telling me that it won't matter if the majority of the people voted blank and only the majority elected from both parties will be the winner? Are you expressing an assertion or a doubt? Through this I am wondering if the people can finally get rid of both parties by opposing a majority?
A blank ballot, in terms of election law and regulation, is not countable. A blank ballot is null and void.
Do you really think that the way to undermine the Democrats and Republicans is to throw away the right to vote? To cast a blank ballot?
How does throwing your vote away get rid of political parties you don't like?
In other countries is not "trowing away you right"; in fact doesn't seem much like a right to vote if you must vote only for predefined candidate. In my country (which is not example of democracy and well organized society at all, but at least this particular makes sense) if the mayority of the people gives a blank vote none of the candidates will be allowed to become president, a new election must be done and diferent candidates formulated. Do bare in mind that there is a special space to vote blank and is counted separatedly from null votes.
Presidents are not chosen by popular vote. Not voting is not a null vote or a vote for "none of the above." It is simply a non-vote. There have been elections in which a minority of those eligible to vote cast their votes. It is not unusual for less than 50% of the population over 18 to cast a ballot.
If one person per state voted for the same candidate for President that person would be President of the United States and appropriately so since everyone else decided to abdicate their responsibility to exercise the franchise they own. If you want an end to the current political parties than I would suggest finding as many like minded people as possible and start a movement within one of the two long established parties.
But they are elected by popular vote. Not directly.
Wikipedia says :"If protest vote takes the form of a blank vote, it may or may not be tallied into final results depending on the rules. Thus, it may either result in a spoilt vote (which is the case most of the times) or, if the electoral system accepts to take it into account, as a "None of the Above" vote."
It may become a "None of the above".
Again, if a majority (I mean by that, that the total ballots counted would represent half of the voting-eligible population like in 2012) become "none of the above", what would become of the election?
Starting a movement within one of the two long established parties would mean that one of them is independent, and we both know that they are both corrupt.
It is obvious that formation of new parties---parties with political clout, is a very real possibility in the present.
Example: The Tea Party Movement.
The Republican Party, itself, arose from the ashes of the Whigs.
Exactly and the modern Democratic Party emerged from the remains of various factions of the old Democratic-Republican Party that had, for all intents and purposes, collapsed with the election of Andrew Jackson.
Interestingly enough, the Democratic Party was a remnant of the Jeffersonian Republican Party (or simply the Republican Party) that had opposed the old Federalist Party.
Interesting stuff to be sure.
But, the idea that we change politics by abandoning our civic duty to vote is nonsensical.
Blank ballots are discarded as they should be.
Elections are not about mindless grandstanding. If you don't like the current parties---national, state, or local, then organize a new party and work to sell your party to the electorate.
American political history is NOT the history of the Democratic and/or Republican parties in their current iterations.
American political history is a history of diversity of parties; of evolution of parties; of parties---including those with significant political and electoral power, coming and going.
If you vote a blank ballot, they win. They win either way. Unfortunately change does not just happen. There has to be an atmosphere of openness and accessibility for any change to take place. The two party system we now have has a stranglehold on any new things that can take place. If you want to effect any change we need to change the rules they have perverted and make government service the priority and not the vehicle to individual gain.
Term Limits, Publicly Financed Campaigns and Lobby Reform is the only way to effect any change. Take the greed out of the equation and you will get change.
Read some US election law. It varies state to state; sometimes county to county or election district to election district.
by H C Palting 2 years ago
At this point, who are you most likely to vote for in the Presidential election and why?
by Drive-by Quipper 5 years ago
This is why Romney lost. He displayed poor cognitive reasoning. He actually said that the widely known fact that smaller classroom size in schools is advantageous to students was misinformation perpetuated by teacher's unions to hire more teachers.Are teachers insidious, or is Romney...
by mio cid 6 years ago
The way the republican party is positioning itself it may become an endangered specie.with democrats getting over 90 percent of the african american vote and the hispanic vote heading in that direction, as well as almost every other minority how do republicans plan to win an election in the future?
by Linda Crist 5 years ago
Have you decided not to vote in the 2012 Presidential Election?Can you explain your reason for choosing not to vote?
by Ralph Deeds 7 years ago
This week in Michigan enough Tea Party delegates showed up at a Republican meeting to elect delegates to the party's nominating convention for the election in November to defeat the current Republican party chairman's bid to be elected a delegate. This strikes me as a cataclysmic event for the...
by ahorseback 2 weeks ago
Absolute political paranoia has somehow evolved into the very DNA of the democratic Party? How long can the democratic party be so stagnant in social advancements , the naysaying of cultural advancements is so damning as to demonstrably show democratic party as...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|