Practiality of making poll options anonymous

[ray245]

If there is anything wrong with election as we see it, it's the fact the general public as a whole could not understand if the politicians they are voting for is the person who is accurately representing their interest and not the person who comes from the political party their family members support or political figures that seems more likeable than other candidate.

Like how the general public would view the healthcare reforms as an example, where they couldn't understand if having a UHC system would really benefit them or not.

So would there be any practical issues with the idea of making poll options anonymous? Meaning instead of having the name of the politician or the political party you are voting for on paper, you get a number of options listed in an alphabetical order that details what sort of policies Party A, B or C would have.

The specific policies would not be given any labelling as well, instead would have a short description about what universal health care is really all about.

For example, if you are voting for the democrat party for presidential elections, how it will appear on the polling paper would be something like this:

Political party A.

Policies.

Healthcare
- Collecting people's money into a centralise fund, that could re-distribute money to people who seek healthcare treatment in hospital.

If anyone says that this is going to making election a tedious process for the voters, I would say this is a good thing. If your only concern is voting for the party you like into power like how you support a sports team over another, and can be turned off when elections is no longer fun, then by right you should not vote, nor are you forced to vote.

At the same time, parties would be voted in not because of the money they can raise in a political campaign, but the issues that they support. At the same time, it would actually allow third parties in nations like the US to rise to power based on the issues that they support.

I have yet to spot anything that would make this idea impractical in my opinion, but if you guys manage to spot a major flaw in this idea, feel free to rip it to pieces.

[Skgoa]

what would stop me from lying even more than is already common in politics? what would stop me from getting polling information on what the majority is likely to vote for and put exactly that as my policies? what would stop me from getting elected, doing whatever I fucking want and then simply getting reelected through my superior polling data, even though the only person in the country who wants to see me in office ever again is myself?


edit/ to clarify: I like your idea, I just think that it is more suited to direct democracy than a representative republic.

[Questor]

edit/ to clarify: I like your idea, I just think that it is more suited to direct democracy than a representative republic.

The same techniques can be used to screw with direct democracy. See CA ballot props.

We all get a voter information packet that sounds like this, and some of the information is repeated on the ballot itself.

[Narkis]

And what would stop me from copying a major party's positions and putting them on the poll as my own? How could the voters tell two (or three, or four) identical options apart? And what about the people who'd know that Party A=Current Government, Party B=Opposition? Would they be allowed to vote, or not?

[ray245]

edit/ to clarify: I like your idea, I just think that it is more suited to direct democracy than a representative republic.

The same techniques can be used to screw with direct democracy. See CA ballot props.

We all get a voter information packet that sounds like this, and some of the information is repeated on the ballot itself.

I'm talking about a system where you don't know what is the party that subscribe to those beliefs.

And what would stop me from copying a major party's positions and putting them on the poll as my own? How could the voters tell two (or three, or four) identical options apart?

Shouldn't the voters make up their minds by considering which political party held the most amount of common belief with them?

And what about the people who'd know that Party A=Current Government, Party B=Opposition? Would they be allowed to vote, or not?

Interesting point, although I would think that people who decides to take up the job or volunteer as an election worker would have considered this possibility before taking the job.

what would stop me from lying even more than is already common in politics? what would stop me from getting polling information on what the majority is likely to vote for and put exactly that as my policies? what would stop me from getting elected, doing whatever I fucking want and then simply getting reelected through my superior polling data, even though the only person in the country who wants to see me in office ever again is myself?

I was thinking that the person who create those options on the poll would be the ones who will put the information down, and not the political party candidate themselves, and the policies that is listed under the candidate would be the policies that is listed by the party candidate during the campaigning process.

[Count Chocula]

People vote for people, and the policies they articulate.

Politics affect people directly, for good or bad.

Voting for or against concepts, without people representing them, is a level of abstraction that IMO will not ever be a valid polling principle. Especially if the people behind their concepts are revealed to be liars (practically a given) once a face is put to the policies voted for.

[Narkis]

And what would stop me from copying a major party's positions and putting them on the poll as my own? How could the voters tell two (or three, or four) identical options apart?

Shouldn't the voters make up their minds by considering which political party held the most amount of common belief with them?

Common belief with them is part of the decision, but not the whole. The ability to carry them through is also a pretty important part of it. Let's say there are two parties, the Blues and the Greens. Their platforms are very much alike other than some very minor details. But the Blues are corrupted imbeciles, while the Greens are fairly reasonable people. You go to the polling station decided to vote for the Greens. You're handed a piece of paper that reads "Party A - stuff" "Party B - stuff", where "stuff" is the same in both options. What do you do?

And what about the people who'd know that Party A=Current Government, Party B=Opposition? Would they be allowed to vote, or not?

Interesting point, although I would think that people who decides to take up the job or volunteer as an election worker would have considered this possibility before taking the job.

Finding volunteers is already pretty hard. I don't know what's happening over there, but here it's already handed like jury duty. And most of the chosen people try their best to avoid it. Just imagine if being an election worker meant that you not only lose your Sunday, but also your political rights.