That pretty well sums it up! The US elections are a good example because
of the amount of data available, but the pattern of low turnout repeats
itself in many other circumstances. People tend to vote more when they
are angry about something, but creating a crisis just to get people out
to vote would be too much like trolling. Any reasonable expansion of the
voter base is unlikely to accomplish much beyond correcting a few
inequities, The problem has less to do with those who can't vote, and
more with those who won't.
Ec
On 03/21/11 7:21 AM, brock.weller(a)gmail.com wrote:
It's a chicken and egg thing. The elections arent
important so they dont
know about the candidates and they dont know about the candidates because
the elections not important.
-Brock
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 4:33 AM, Thomas Dalton<thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
> On 21 March 2011 09:49, Ray Saintonge<saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:
>> Even in US elections the turnout is much lower for the mid-terms. It's
>> relatively easy to decide on a presidential candidate, but the degree of
>> being informed drops significantly for offices further down the
>> political food chain.
> I would have thought turnout was lower because people think they
> aren't as important as the presidential elections, rather than because
> they don't know which way to vote.