In short:

A high number of informal votes in a rural NSW electorate with a record number of candidates has been labelled "shameful" by the region's MP.

By May 6 more than 11,000 informal votes had been recorded in the Riverina electorate, accounting for more than 10 per cent of the voter turnout.

What's next?

Riverina MP Michael McCormack and political scientist Dominic O'Sullivan say the voting system should be reformed.

top 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Nath@aussie.zone 1 points 1 hour ago

🎶 Why can't you seeee~eeeee~
You belong to meeee~eeeee~ 🎶

[–] dumblederp@aussie.zone 10 points 1 day ago

Guy who relies on votes complains about wasted votes. News at 6.

[–] No1@aussie.zone 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

My understanding is that an informal vote IS a valid way of voting. It may not be what I do, or what you do, or what he does. But people have the right to vote as they wish, and if that results in an invalid vote, then so be it. They are entitled to vote that way.

Is he really whinging that they didn't vote for him?

One other possibility that wasn't covered in the article is that perhaps there were so many informal votes in that electorate because the voters in that electorate are, on average, more stupid than elsewhere in Australia and simply were unable to cast a valid vote. I really would like to see have seen some hard data on that. If that is actually the case, then this guy's complaint that stupid people can't vote properly may be seen by some people as, well, er, stupid.

So, that sends us into the twilight zone, as it begs question: Could Michael McCormack have voted informally?

brain asplodes

[–] techno_analyst@aussie.zone 4 points 12 hours ago

The Riverina electorate had 13 lower house candidates – the equal-highest nationally – and he said such a "large number" was known to confuse voters.

Old mate thinks the locals can’t handle double digit numbers.

[–] eureka@aussie.zone 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

My understanding is that an informal vote IS a valid way of voting.

An intentional informal vote is a valid form of political expression. I think it's stupid idealism, and it's not a valid vote, but it's valid as political expression. Like you mentioned, there are also accidental informal votes, like [1, 2, 3, 1, 4] or [1, , , , ].

(A donkey vote, [1, 2, 3, 4, 5], is a valid vote)

[–] Tenderizer@aussie.zone 3 points 8 hours ago

More people should spoil their ballot instead of doing the donkey vote. If they want to express disinterest, the former is better than the latter.

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 day ago

Yeah, I commonly assert to people that we don't actually have mandatory voting in Australia. The only thing that's mandatory is showing up, having your name crossed off the roll, and putting your ballots in the box. Considering the sanctity we treat the secret ballot with, that's always going to be the case!

Besides, I get a lot less irked by people doing that in Australia, because it's still a very active decision that (some? most?) people make. Compare that to America where a bunch of lazy cunts just don't bother (and a bunch more can't vote because the government isn't obliged to make it easy for them)!