 |
|
lightblue
|
|
L'Boro, UK
Oct 2001
time: 05:34
|
|
I think the common method of indicating your complete displeasure with all candidates is to spoil your ballot.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:34
|
|
Because other people might vote anyway. Let say 50% of voters ignored the poll and stayed home. The result of the poll, will be considered as legitimate and those 50% percents of voters who participated, will elect one of the candidates.
On the other hand, if those 50% of participants who ignored the poll, had option to vote "against all" and actually used this option, then the result would have been different. In this case, (if option "against all" will gain the most of the votes) all candidates will be considered as loosers and new election campaign should be started, but this time without those candidates.
That's how it work in Russian law. I'm pretty surprised you don't have this option.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Ralph
In case they check who went voting and who didn't, staying home signals it even better. It's a clear and personal statement. |
No. There are many different reasons for people not to go to vote: one could simply not be arsed with democracy, one could be confused and not understand anything, one could feel he cannot take the responsibility to vote (yep, I met one of those), one could be too old or ill to go to the polling booth, one could oppose the very idea of democracy, or one could distrust the parties and refuse to vote on these grounds.
Voting "none of the above" IS an obvious, one-meaning political statement. Staying at home is far from being a clear signal.
Void votes aren't dishonest: at the opposite, they're the honest statement that you like the idea of democracy, but hate the crooks that pretend to control it currently.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Sir Ralph
|
 |
Long live teh Schwampel!
Dec 2001
time: 06:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spiffor
No. There are many different reasons for people not to go to vote: one could simply not be arsed with democracy, one could be confused and not understand anything, one could feel he cannot take the responsibility to vote (yep, I met one of those), one could be too old or ill to go to the polling booth, one could oppose the very idea of democracy, or one could distrust the parties and refuse to vote on these grounds.
Voting "none of the above" IS an obvious, one-meaning political statement. Staying at home is far from being a clear signal.
Void votes aren't dishonest: at the opposite, they're the honest statement that you like the idea of democracy, but hate the crooks that pretend to control it currently. |
Well, we don't have the "none of the above" option, golubchik.  If we had it, the problem would be solved. But since we don't have it, not going to the polls is more honest than to go and void the ballot.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:34
|
|
serb - the impression here is that
1. while Russian newspapers are lively and free, Russian TV is not, and that Putin has deliberately made a point of subjecting one network after another to his control
2. While there are valid arguments for going after the oligarchcs, Putin has made a point of going after specifically those oligarchs who bankrolled the opposition. And this has had a chilling effect
3. While Putin IS popular, and might well have won anyway, the Russian political scene IS being impacted by 1 and 2.
4. Putin has been heavily staffing the russian govt, especially the "power ministries" with ex-KGB
5. Considering all of the above, while Russia may still be a democracy, it is increasingly moving in an authoritarian direction.
Of course Russia is a sovereign country, and is not required to meet Western standards of what is or is not a democracy. However for those of us who saw change in Russia as a key factor in the world moving forward, this is still a matter of concern.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lord of the mark
serb - the impression here is that
1. while Russian newspapers are lively and free, Russian TV is not, and that Putin has deliberately made a point of subjecting one network after another to his control |
There were two scandals around tv companies, NTV (owned by Gusinsky) and TV-6 (owned by Berezovsky). Both of them (owners of those tv companies) are... fuc... hm... well... let's say - "not honest or good persons, pursued by police, a susspects". Personaly I would prefer to see both of them in jail.
NTV has changed the owner and TV-6 lost its licence. The personel of those companies didn't dissapeared. They are (I mean reporters and journalists) still working in different companies and still pretty hostile to Putin. Most of the staff fleed to Ren-TV tv company and now continue their anti-Putin crusade from there.
quote:
2. While there are valid arguments for going after the oligarchcs, Putin has made a point of going after specifically those oligarchs who bankrolled the opposition. And this has had a chilling effect |
Ha.
If you stole a dollar, you are thief, if you stole a billion dollars, you are head of opposition to government, a freedom fighter.
Every thief, when he feel (or know, or fear) that he will be arrested for his crimes soon, is trying to portray himself as an innocent victim. It's typical behavior for criminals. Those bastards knew that sooner or later, police will come to bring them in court and they bankrolled the opposition:
a) When it will happen (the will be arrested for their crimes) they will portray themselves as victims of evil dictator Putin, who fights against free media.
b) Because they do not like Putin and want to change the situation and bring back their "golden age" (like during Yeltsin's rule) when they had a real political power, to bring back the enviroment which let them steal billions without any punishment.
Also, I think/I hope that fight vs. oligarchs is not over yet. I heard Abramovich, the guy who bought Chelsea, also bought a castle (for 5,5 million British pounds, not a big money for him, since within a couple of years he "made" 26 times more money, then British queen have now) in GB. I guess he is planning to move to UK permanently.
quote:
3. While Putin IS popular, and might well have won anyway, the Russian political scene IS being impacted by 1 and 2. |
Sure it was, that's was the oligarch's idea- your media now portrays them as victims and Putin as dictator who crush any opposition.
quote:
4. Putin has been heavily staffing the russian govt, especially the "power ministries" with ex-KGB |
Really? Who exactly in new government do you mean?
Anyhow, I heard a daddy of your current president was a cheif of CIA for a while? So? 
quote:
5. Considering all of the above, while Russia may still be a democracy, it is increasingly moving in an authoritarian direction. |
I don't think so.
quote:
Of course Russia is a sovereign country, and is not required to meet Western standards of what is or is not a democracy. However for those of us who saw change in Russia as a key factor in the world moving forward, this is still a matter of concern. |
Ok. I just think that Putin do not deserve word "dictator". I do not think he deserve ALL this BS your and partitially (the part sponsored by opposition) our media says about him. Despite I didn't vote for him, I think he is doing his best to make Russia a better country. And I'm pretty sure he will not come against the constitution as many fears, and there will be not 3rd term for him.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
15-03-2004 14:52
.
Yep, it sucks, completely sucks. And guys like Imran and DD are lecturing us about democracy?
|