OT: Something I learned today.

[SackAttack]

In Russia, by law, election results are only valid if greater than 50% of the voting-age population actually votes.

That's an interesting thought, but it does amount to compulsive democracy. Is forcing an ignorant electorate to cast their vote really the best long-term idea for a society?

What, I wonder, would be the results of the 2004 elections if the US had a similar law?

[finkenst]

don't the US presidential elections always have >50% turnout? I thought it did but the off-year (particularly odd-years) elections were typical not a very large turnout.

[SackAttack]

They usually do, but I probably wouldn't use 50% as the cutoff in the US (hence 'similar'). I'd probably put it between 60%-70% instead, if I were drafting the law. Would it have a noticeable impact on the electorate's knowledge of the issues (i.e. I HAVE to vote if I want any real change to occur, I better make sure I know what I'm voting on), or would it just end up being mass ignorance on a grander scale?

[finkenst]

i'm leaning toward mass ignorance on a grander scale.

[Tekneek]

i'm leaning toward mass ignorance on a grander scale.

Either that or we would never get a legal election completed due to people not knowing it was mandatory voting day.

[JonInMiddleGA]

... or would it just end up being mass ignorance on a grander scale?
I believe that's a pretty good description.

[Hurst2112]

didn't clinton's 2nd term election have really low turnout? I remeber Dennis miller (or kevin nealon) doing something on SNL about it. The joke was based around a chart that showed less than 50 percent of people showing up to vote. Clinton grabbed about half of that, so he really only won by around 26-28 percent of America's population wanting him as president.

Of course, the numbers aren't exact, and it was SNL. Still...I would think that it would be hard to get above 50 percent turnout for voting at any election.

[Alf]

They usually do, but I probably wouldn't use 50% as the cutoff in the US (hence 'similar'). I'd probably put it between 60%-70% instead, if I were drafting the law. Would it have a noticeable impact on the electorate's knowledge of the issues (i.e. I HAVE to vote if I want any real change to occur, I better make sure I know what I'm voting on), or would it just end up being mass ignorance on a grander scale?
Recently, elections in France have seen lower than 70% participant on a regular basis... Down to 60% and below for the next elections (local & regional).