6 ms·
Elections should reflect the will of the people. But it's kind of gamed, because lots of people don't vote. And then it becomes about who has the money, and gr
by dukeofdoom 3y ago
Elections should reflect the will of the people. But it's kind of gamed, because
lots of people don't vote. And then it becomes about who has the money, and ground work to get out their voters to vote.
Say you were willing to cheat to have your candidate win the vote. Not uncommon historically through out the world. One way of doing it is to wait for election results, then make up the margin with fake ballots or fraud. This is why the opportunity to cheat is greater if elections take a week to tabulate, as opposed to same day results.
Not knowing the results, and not being able to game the system, even for one day, in theory should more accurately reflect the will of the general population, even the ones that don't vote.
- viraptor 3y ago> because lots of people don't vote Apart from countries with mandatory elections, like Australia which reaches ~90% turnout.
- Krasnol 3y ago> Elections should reflect the will of the people. But it's kind of gamed, because lots of people don't vote. How does "not voting" not reflect the will of the people? They're not forced to not vote. It's their will to not vote.
- dukeofdoom 3y agoLots of apathy and people that gave up on politics and dont vote. Yet they don't support the current government. For example they sit out because only able to chose between two terrible or undesirable candidates. Or maybe they feel the political system is rigged, or voting is fake. There's going to be discrepancy between who wins the voting game, and who the people support. Sampling Errors, where the method of voting favors only certain demographics would produce such results