Reject the election. Don’t mark your ballot!

[[email protected]]

Canadians go to the polls, again.

Are you a disaffected and angry voter? Planning to pass on election day? Unwilling to play ‘party games’ again? Shouldn’t an election be about hope and renewal?

There is one alternative. Reject your ballot on election day! Make the election a referendum on our political system!!

It is hard for people to express dissatisfaction with our politics other than not voting. But not voting does nothing to fix our political system.

In the 2008 federal election 94,733 ballots were reported as rejected. A Rejected Ballot is one that cannot be counted because it is improperly marked. The easiest way is to make no mark or select two or more choices. Elections Canada reports the number of Rejected Ballots.

This is different from a Spoiled Ballot; one that is altered, defaced or destroyed. Spoiling a ballot is contrary to the Canada Elections Act and conviction could bring a $500 fine or three months in jail. So please do not spoil you ballot, not only is it against the law but spoiled ballots are not reported by EC.

Let’s make this election into something positive by sending the message that we, The People, want to see real political reform, that it is no longer sufficient to just shuffle parties around. A jump in the number of rejected ballots will be a far more productive outcome than any vote for the status-quo parties.

Remember this is the ONLY time you have any kind of say in our political system, don’t mess it up by staying home. Send a clear positive message this election! Don’t mark your ballot!

Join the campaign.

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_198289110205880

[WWWTT]

I sincerely doubt anyone has ever bein charged let alone convicted of spoiling their ballot.

Elections are annanamous and pinpointing the evidence to a specific individual would be in violation of possibly several laws.

WWWTT

Edited March 26, 2011 by Charles Anthony
deleted re-copied Opening Post

[Bryan]

As a Conservative, I want to encourage this ballot spoiling. Everyone who opposes Harper should do it, IMO.

[msj]

This sounds like something that should go on whitewhine.com.

A collection of first world problems.

Our problems are so horrific compared to the rest of the world - imagine having the choice to go to the polls to vote - or not.

[Michael Hardner]

This sounds like something that should go on whitewhine.com.

A collection of first world problems.

Our problems are so horrific compared to the rest of the world - imagine having the choice to go to the polls to vote - or not.

I don't think rejecting your ballot, or declining your ballot is an option in Federal Elections:

Elections.ca

1.2.2 Option to Decline Ballot

There is a growing perception among some of Canada's electorate that there should be a way in which an elector can register his or her dissatisfaction with the political process by declining his or her ballot. The Canada Elections Act currently does not provide any authority for that to be done.17

[msj]

I don't think rejecting your ballot, or declining your ballot is an option in Federal Elections:

Elections.ca

Looking at the 2008 election results in my riding, I see 16 rejected ballots.

Not sure why or how, but there it is.

Also not sure how this is going to encourage any kind of change in our system: it is, at best, passive aggressive.

Hey, OP, ya wanna effect change? Then get off your damn ass and make change - join a party, get involved, and be active.

Otherwise, you belong on the dust heap of whitewhine.com

[Sir Bandelot]

Looking at the 2008 election results in my riding, I see 16 rejected ballots.

Hey, OP, ya wanna effect change? Then get off your damn ass and make change - join a party, get involved, and be active.

Otherwise, you belong on the dust heap of whitewhine.com

Ahaha, join the chump brigade.

WHile I don't totally agree that the OP's post provides a solution, the election is not about voting for anyone. It's about voting against someone.

[wyly]

Our problems are so horrific compared to the rest of the world - imagine having the choice to go to the polls to vote - or not.

very true we have all these conservative whiners complaining about the defeat of the regime and the needless vote/election, I'd vote every year if need be and be happy doing it rather than lose that privilege...conservatives apparently would prefer we never vote because it's to inconvenient (we should be grateful to cow ourselves to dear leader) which is hardly a surprising attitude it's consistent with the harper regime's contempt for parliament...

[Michael Hardner]

Looking at the 2008 election results in my riding, I see 16 rejected ballots.

Not sure why or how, but there it is.

Also not sure how this is going to encourage any kind of change in our system: it is, at best, passive aggressive.

Hey, OP, ya wanna effect change? Then get off your damn ass and make change - join a party, get involved, and be active.

Otherwise, you belong on the dust heap of whitewhine.com

Your link doesn't work. Give us a link to the section in the site, and an excerpt.

I suppose that such a low number may indicate just a confusion on the part of electoral officers.

[RNG]

I have lobbied both my MP and MLA at times to try and get "None of the Above" as a choice on all ballots.

Edited March 26, 2011 by RNG

[M.Dancer]

Your link doesn't work. Give us a link to the section in the site, and an excerpt.

I suppose that such a low number may indicate just a confusion on the part of electoral officers.

Those are spoiled ballots....someone who selects more than one candidate.....

[msj]

Your link doesn't work. Give us a link to the section in the site, and an excerpt.

I suppose that such a low number may indicate just a confusion on the part of electoral officers.

Follow the link then press "Poll-by-poll results Electoral districts" and then select BC then "Nanaimo - Alberni - 59014" to see what I was trying to link to.

Select other districts to see other rejections in those districts.

[msj]

I have lobbied both my MP and MLA at times to try and get "None of the Above" as a choice on all ballots.

I agree with having this as an option (and even putting on "I reject the system, the man can't keep me down....") but what good is it going to do?

If I were trying to get elected do you really think I'm going to give a flying f^ck about people who choose "none of the above" or "reject?"

I mean, really, do you think I should give a crap?

Now, put on the ballot a candidate and/or a political party with deep grass roots commitment (i.e. people willing to vote for that person and not for me) and now I would care.

So, give the people the choice to vent but lets not pretend it is going to effect any kind of real change.

And lets not pretend that this is somehow any more important than any of the laughable first world whines that show up on whitewhine.com.

[Moonlight Graham]

WHile I don't totally agree that the OP's post provides a solution, the election is not about voting for anyone. It's about voting against someone.

No, it's about voting for who is least horrible.

[Wilber]

If I were trying to get elected do you really think I'm going to give a flying f^ck about people who choose "none of the above" or "reject?"

I mean, really, do you think I should give a crap?

You should because that is a vote you didn't get. In a very close riding, enough of them might mean the difference between you getting elected and not. If you won in a close race the last time, all you have to do is piss off enough voters who voted for you the last time. You could lose even though the competition got the same number of votes. It's the same as you former supporters not showing up.

[msj]

You should because that is a vote you didn't get. In a very close riding, enough of them might mean the difference between you getting elected and not. If you won in a close race the last time, all you have to do is piss off enough voters who voted for you the last time. You could lose even though the competition got the same number of votes. It's the same as you former supporters not showing up.

How do you know what people want when they're preferred method is to snub their noses, hold onto the ball and whine they are not going to play anymore?

If I was running for election I would be interested in the people who do vote and are most likely to vote.

Anyone else would be a waste of time.

[Wilber]

How do you know what people want when they're preferred method is to snub their noses, hold onto the ball and whine they are not going to play anymore?

If I was running for election I would be interested in the people who do vote and are most likely to vote.

Anyone else would be a waste of time.

In order to win, you need people to vote for you. The fact they are willing to go to a poling station and deliberately spoil a ballot means they do want to vote. They are playing and they are telling you to take a hike. The fact they don't want to vote for you is your problem and you should be very concerned about it. You can lose by losing votes just as easily as you can win by gaining them. They don't have to be at your opponents expense.

If you won an election by 100 votes the last time and 101 of those who voted for you decided to spoil their ballots this time. You would lose, even if your opponent got the same number of votes he did in the last election. I would seem those 101 came to the conclusion that you were a waste of their time.

[msj]

In order to win, you need people to vote for you. The fact they are willing to go to a poling station and deliberately spoil a ballot means they do want to vote. They are playing and they are telling you to take a hike. The fact they don't want to vote for you is your problem and you should be very concerned about it. You can lose by losing votes just as easily as you can win by gaining them. They don't have to be at your opponents expense.

If you won an election by 100 votes the last time and 101 of those who voted for you decided to spoil their ballots this time. You would lose, even if your opponent got the same number of votes he did in the last election. I would seem those 101 came to the conclusion that you were a waste of their time.

The fact that they are marking a ballot as "spoiled" or "reject" would tell all of the candidates running in that riding, never mind the national parties, very little.

Are they dissatisfied because we have had a minority government situation which leads to less passage of legislation?

Is it the poorer quality of legislation inherent from a minority government?

Is it this, is it that, etc?

The fact is, these people are telling candidates very little other than they are cynical and lazy.

If they got off their lazy asses, started writing letters, forming parties (if necessary), and tried for real active change then maybe they could elect someone (or even a party) that they would find suitable and respectable to vote for - but who knows?

Instead they think that voting for no one is somehow equal to, or better than, voting for someone or that it is better even than someone voting for candidate X because he doesn't like candidate Y.

Actively voting, even against someone, is still less cynical and more effective than the passive aggressive nonsense of rejecting everyone.

[GWiz]

Hey, OP, ya wanna effect change? Then get off your damn ass and make change - join a party, get involved, and be active.

Right on the money... Excellent!

I believe that's called "putting your money where your mouth is"...

At the very least one should find out WHO your local candidates are, WHAT a candidate stands for, WHY they are running for election, HOW will they represent YOU and his/her other constituents in Parliament...

That's called making an INFORMED choice in a DEMOCRACY which whatever you may think about Canada's "political system" is a hell of a lot better that what most of the world has...

[admax88]

In order to win, you need people to vote for you. The fact they are willing to go to a poling station and deliberately spoil a ballot means they do want to vote. They are playing and they are telling you to take a hike. The fact they don't want to vote for you is your problem and you should be very concerned about it. You can lose by losing votes just as easily as you can win by gaining them. They don't have to be at your opponents expense.

If you won an election by 100 votes the last time and 101 of those who voted for you decided to spoil their ballots this time. You would lose, even if your opponent got the same number of votes he did in the last election. I would seem those 101 came to the conclusion that you were a waste of their time.

If you think any politician is going to give two shits about you because you "spoiled" your ballot, you are sadly mistaken. Decisions are made by those who show up. You're lucky enough to live in a democracy where you can vote someone to represent you at the highest levels of government. If you don't get involved and tell politicians what's important to you, and what you look for when you're voting, how can you possibly expect anyone to come along and pander to your views. If you wont get involved in your government, why should it get involved with you?

[Wilber]

If you think any politician is going to give two shits about you because you "spoiled" your ballot, you are sadly mistaken. Decisions are made by those who show up. You're lucky enough to live in a democracy where you can vote someone to represent you at the highest levels of government. If you don't get involved and tell politicians what's important to you, and what you look for when you're voting, how can you possibly expect anyone to come along and pander to your views. If you wont get involved in your government, why should it get involved with you?

A person who spoiled their ballot did show up and you didn't get their vote. I'm not advocating that someone should spoil their ballot, that's up to them. Im only saying it does make a statement and it can affect an election result. I agree that one should people should let politicians know what is important to them but if they don't see that represented before or during an election why should someone get their vote? Why should I give my vote to someone who has little better to offer than a claim the other guy is worse? Voting against someone doesn't tell anyone what's important to you, it's more an act of desperation. You shouldn't assume that someone who spoils a ballot isn't involved.

Edited March 27, 2011 by Wilber

[Smallc]

So,what, exactly, is the solution?

[msj]

So,what, exactly, is the solution?

The solution is to get involved and get active.

Spoiling/rejecting ballots is all about making one feel involved but it will not be the impetuous for change since it is nothing more than passive aggressive non-communication between a voter and ... well, who the hell knows who they're trying to talk to.

Which is why these people should be allowed to spoil/reject their ballots - see they can feel better while seeing that what they are doing means sweet bugger all.

[Smallc]

The solution is to get involved and get active.

Sorry, I meant to disaffected voters. I don't really care what they do....but I don't blame politicians, who are only humans, for they way that other humans feel about them.

[msj]

Sorry, I meant to disaffected voters. I don't really care what they do....but I don't blame politicians, who are only humans, for they way that other humans feel about them.

That's just it: at least the politicians get active.

We may disagree with much of what they do but at least they are doing something.

The disaffected voter is a lazy, cynical, passive aggressive twit who, rightfully, should be ignored.

Give them the "voice" they want on the ballot so that we can go back to ignoring these people so that we can change Canada by, you know, actually getting off our lazy asses and getting involved.