Scotland

[unkated]

So, in our time line, I guess we won't be starting the cattle raids next week?

Uncle Ted
(who has no trace of blood from west of the Oder or north of the Vistula, much less north of the Channel)

[Cdnwolf]

Nothing stopping you. ;)

[WallShadow]

Just make sure you have your pre-bloodied shirt ready!

[Targan]

A direct-line paternal ancestor of mine (Hugh Sempill, the 12th Lord Sempill) was the Brigadier General commanding the left flank of the Royal Army at the Battle of Culloden, so for better or for worse my family has been involved in keeping Scotland part of the United Kingdom. His unit still exists to this day as the Royal Scots Borderers (previously the King's Own Scottish Borderers).

[kato13]

Was anyone else very pleased to see 85% turnout regardless of the outcome.

In the US we are used to turnout with a maximum of about 50% (It looks similar in Scotland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Scotland) as well). That is always disappointing, but I guess people don't feel that their vote makes a difference (amongst other things). Apparently when there is a clear cut choice with far ranging and obvious consequences, people can be motivated to get out and vote. That is encouraging.

[Targan]

We force democracy on our people here in Australia :D

If you don't vote you get fined.

[kato13]

We force democracy on our people here in Australia :D

If you don't vote you get fined.


I knew about that, but I always wondered if you can not select anything, or pick "none of the above" if none of the candidates were acceptable to you.

I also would like to know if "None of the Above" as an option wold increase voting here.

[Rainbow Six]

Was anyone else very pleased to see 85% turnout regardless of the outcome.

In the US we are used to turnout with a maximum of about 50% (It looks similar in Scotland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Scotland) as well). That is always disappointing, but I guess people don't feel that their vote makes a difference (amongst other things). Apparently when there is a clear cut choice with far ranging and obvious consequences, people can be motivated to get out and vote. That is encouraging.

I'm on holiday at the moment with limited online time, so I'll only comment briefly here by saying that the turnout was unprecedented and is a reflection of the levels of engagement and emotion that have existed throughout Scotland over the last two years.

And yes, not only was I pleased by the turnout, as a Scot I'm proud of it.

[Targan]

I knew about that, but I always wondered if you can not select anything, or pick "none of the above" if none of the candidates were acceptable to you.

I also would like to know if "None of the Above" as an option wold increase voting here.

Yes, really all you need to do to not get fined is have your name ticked off the list at a polling place and take a ballot paper. It's not illegal to cast a "donkey vote". It would be perfectly fine under Australian regulations to write "none of the above" on your ballot paper.

[kato13]

Yes, really all you need to do to not get fined is have your name ticked off the list at a polling place and take a ballot paper. It's not illegal to cast a "donkey vote". It would be perfectly fine under Australian regulations to write "none of the above" on your ballot paper.

Interesting.

Donkey Vote (wiki link). I had to look it up so I figured I would help out anyone else who might need to.

[Askold]

If making an empty vote or voting Donald Duck or something was against the laws then wouldn't it be impossible to prove without actually violating voting confindentiality?

[Cdnwolf]

Yes, really all you need to do to not get fined is have your name ticked off the list at a polling place and take a ballot paper. It's not illegal to cast a "donkey vote". It would be perfectly fine under Australian regulations to write "none of the above" on your ballot paper.



SOOOO that is how you were elected...

[kato13]

If making an empty vote or voting Donald Duck or something was against the laws then wouldn't it be impossible to prove without actually violating voting confindentiality?


In Chicago after the "hanging chad" election (presidential of 2000) where there was much controversy over mis-punched voting cards in Florida, you had to put your ballot into an electronic reader which would check if there were any selections which were missing.

For one or two elections they would not accept the ballot if any votes were missing. After those elections you had to approve if votes were missing for a couple of elections.

In the historical tradition Chicago is famous for, the original motivating factor was to maximize votes from the region (ostensibly to prevent errors), but the courts decided both that forcing you to vote for someone and then the policy of declaring publicly you did not complete a ballot was a violation of both voting rights and privacy.

[unkated]

In local (town, county, and some less noted state positions), when bored or as a protest, I have a competent friend that I use as a write-in candidate. I'd suppose if I told enough other people (except my friend of course), he could get a surprise...

[pmulcahy11b]

If making an empty vote or voting Donald Duck or something was against the laws then wouldn't it be impossible to prove without actually violating voting confindentiality?

As far as I know (at least in this part of Texas) it's not illegal.