The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Spoiling your ballot is the stupidest thing

Why do people do this? Do you think the winner of the election is going to say "damn, look at all those spoiled ballots - I guess people are unhappy! I'll stand down and we'll have another election"? Or what? What's the point?

You're worse than people who don't vote, because you're actually taking the time and effort to go to the polling station and say "I'M NOT VOTING".

Scroll to see replies

For me, I'd spoil my ballot if I didn't at all approve of any of the candidates. It shows that you are a voter, you aren't apathetic but you are disgruntled with the choices available - it gives potential future candidate more of an incentive to canvass your support if you clearly will bother voting if there's a good option on the table.
Reply 2
Avatar for Omen96
Omen96
1
Original post by JordanL_
Why do people do this? Do you think the winner of the election is going to say "damn, look at all those spoiled ballots - I guess people are unhappy! I'll stand down and we'll have another election"? Or what? What's the point?

You're worse than people who don't vote, because you're actually taking the time and effort to go to the polling station and say "I'M NOT VOTING".


I voted for Tory but kind of regretting it now
I think ballot spoiling is better than not voting at all. It's entirely legitimate to express interest in voting but not like the candidates. It's a measurable means of showing political opinion, as opposed to not voting at all, which could be interpreted as nothing but apathy.
Original post by Saoirse:3
For me, I'd spoil my ballot if I didn't at all approve of any of the candidates. It shows that you are a voter, you aren't apathetic but you are disgruntled with the choices available - it gives potential future candidate more of an incentive to canvass your support if you clearly will bother voting if there's a good option on the table.


Original post by gladders
I think ballot spoiling is better than not voting at all. It's entirely legitimate to express interest in voting but not like the candidates. It's a measurable means of showing political opinion, as opposed to not voting at all, which could be interpreted as nothing but apathy.


But it makes no difference in practice. Whoever wins the election doesn't care if 90% of the country spoiled their ballot, because they won and are now in power. Why would they change anything? Everyone spoiling their ballot clearly worked out great for them.
Original post by JordanL_
But it makes no difference in practice. Whoever wins the election doesn't care if 90% of the country spoiled their ballot, because they won and are now in power. Why would they change anything? Everyone spoiling their ballot clearly worked out great for them.


I think, given the small numbers that do this right now, sure, it's ignorable; but if those who currently abstain did this, they would be a huge number, likely liable to outnumber many candidates or even come top of the poll!

Formally, it would make no difference, but politically such a thing would be an enormously powerful message and it would put considerable pressure on Parliament to do something about it.
Original post by JordanL_
Why do people do this? Do you think the winner of the election is going to say "damn, look at all those spoiled ballots - I guess people are unhappy! I'll stand down and we'll have another election"? Or what? What's the point?

You're worse than people who don't vote, because you're actually taking the time and effort to go to the polling station and say "I'M NOT VOTING".


I agree.
You just wasted your trip to the polling station.
Just do not go.
Original post by gladders
I think, given the small numbers that do this right now, sure, it's ignorable; but if those who currently abstain did this, they would be a huge number, likely liable to outnumber many candidates or even come top of the poll!

Formally, it would make no difference, but politically such a thing would be an enormously powerful message and it would put considerable pressure on Parliament to do something about it.


In what way would it put pressure on Parliament? Parliament wants to stay in power. If everyone is going to keep spoiling their ballot instead of voting against the party in power, Parliament has no incentive whatsoever to do anything.
Original post by JordanL_
In what way would it put pressure on Parliament? Parliament wants to stay in power. If everyone is going to keep spoiling their ballot instead of voting against the party in power, Parliament has no incentive whatsoever to do anything.


It would demonstrate in a way not previously manifested a large groundswell of active discontent with the quality of candidates being fielded for election, as opposed to the present assumption that non-voters simply don't care. It would force political parties to reassess.

Perhaps I'm optimistic :smile: but at the same time, voting for candidates you have no love for won't help at all.
Original post by gladders
It would demonstrate in a way not previously manifested a large groundswell of active discontent with the quality of candidates being fielded for election, as opposed to the present assumption that non-voters simply don't care. It would force political parties to reassess.

Perhaps I'm optimistic :smile: but at the same time, voting for candidates you have no love for won't help at all.


I do think you're being optimistic. It doesn't matter whether non-voters care or not - all that matters is that they don't vote.

I think there are plenty of candidates for people to find someone who best represents their interests. UKIP and Greens on the extreme ends of the spectrum, Labour and Tories are less extreme, and Lib Dems are right in the middle. If you wait for a party that's perfect you'll never vote.
Original post by JordanL_
I do think you're being optimistic. It doesn't matter whether non-voters care or not - all that matters is that they don't vote.

I think there are plenty of candidates for people to find someone who best represents their interests. UKIP and Greens on the extreme ends of the spectrum, Labour and Tories are less extreme, and Lib Dems are right in the middle. If you wait for a party that's perfect you'll never vote.


As a floating voter myself, I don't particularly see any of the parties at present chiming terribly strongly with me.
Original post by JordanL_
But it makes no difference in practice. Whoever wins the election doesn't care if 90% of the country spoiled their ballot, because they won and are now in power. Why would they change anything? Everyone spoiling their ballot clearly worked out great for them.


It's not necessarily about who wins, but about who stands next time. For instance, there are occasionally council wards deemed so safe that nobody bar the incumbent bothers contesting them - there is literally only one option there. A lot of spoilt ballots could get another party to think that perhaps there's more appetite for change than there once was and stand the next time it's up for election.
Spoiling a ballot is childish.

Pick a candidate or stand yourself, no excuse.
Original post by JordanL_
Why do people do this? Do you think the winner of the election is going to say "damn, look at all those spoiled ballots - I guess people are unhappy! I'll stand down and we'll have another election"? Or what? What's the point?

You're worse than people who don't vote, because you're actually taking the time and effort to go to the polling station and say "I'M NOT VOTING".


I agree. There are only very extreme circumstances when doing this actually makes a real difference. If you don't like anyone, it's usually better to to pick the lesser of two evils and then use your time to try and help shape people's opinions and for you to make a difference yourself.

At least spoiling a ballot is marginally better than not voting at all.
Original post by JordanL_
But it makes no difference in practice. Whoever wins the election doesn't care if 90% of the country spoiled their ballot, because they won and are now in power. Why would they change anything? Everyone spoiling their ballot clearly worked out great for them.


If 99% of people spoil their ballot, then everyone knows that no-one supports the government, and therefore there will be little resistance to the imminent revolution.
Original post by sweeneyrod
If 99% of people spoil their ballot, then everyone knows that no-one supports the government, and therefore there will be little resistance to the imminent revolution.


I think the likelihood of such a great number of people spoiling their ballot is incredibly low.
it's a symbol - it's a form of civil disobedience and a rejection of the process of voting altogether
it's usually done reasons of anarchism (and the rejection of the 'suggestion box for slaves' democratic process to them) or the fact that in this current system of FPTP, people aren't given a real choice if they can only practically vote for party A or party 1.

I voted for a "minor" or "third" party in the general election last year, knowing *fully* that they'd *never* win - it was merely to boost the overall voter support, not the seats, for that party, and to shine light on the fact that our electoral system is broken - was that stupid of me to do, knowing that my vote "wouldn't change anything"? the party out of the two in my constituency that would very likely going to win didn't need my vote - I didn't even want to vote or them and to signal respect to a party that isn't working in my interests either way. if parties want my vote, they are going to need to earn it. I don't care about strategic voting.

the only form of strategic voting that I'm going to participate in is revolution or reform based voting, to encourage a change in the voting system, or the system entirely. I don't feel like I have a voice currently.
I think it would be really useful if ballots had a "none of the above" option, and that if enough of the population picked that, nobody won, new delegates were selected by each party, and the election was repeated. That would, to a certain extent, help people to stop voting based simply on who they don't like.
Original post by anosmianAcrimony
I think it would be really useful if ballots had a "none of the above" option, and that if enough of the population picked that, nobody won, new delegates were selected by each party, and the election was repeated. That would, to a certain extent, help people to stop voting based simply on who they don't like.


surely it would be a sign of major disbelief in the electoral system and humiliate politicians if their party only just won in an area over the "none of the above" option? surely that would encourage them to do better or to change things?
Original post by BubbleBoobies
surely it would be a sign of major disbelief in the electoral system and humiliate politicians if their party only just won in an area over the "none of the above" option? surely that would encourage them to do better or to change things?


Why would that encourage them to change things? They won because all of these people didn't vote for a party. It gives them every reason not to change things, the current system works perfectly for them.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you