SPINN: Exit Poll Data: Citizens Uninspired

[Hileville]

<p class='bbc_center'><img class='bbc_img' src='http://thesouthpacific.org/imgs/spinn.png' alt='Posted Image' />
<p class='bbc_center'><strong class='bbc'><em class='bbc'>Citizens Uninspired</em></strong>
<em class='bbc'>Election Headquarters...</em>

Voters in the South Pacific are currently deciding on who the next Chief Justice will be. The Special Election for Chief Justice was called after the resignation of HEM, who SPINN has confirmed will be running for Vice Delegate. Exit poll data has shown that citizens just aren't inspired by the candidates in this election. The latest exit polls showed that Phlontopia with a one point lead over Comrade Troy and Daemyrs with Silentman97 following closely behind.

So what is the issue? Well Phlontopia is only pulling in roughly 16% of the polled voters. Out of 19 voters polled an astonishing 11 have abstained in this election opting to not select anyone. One voter in particular stated "I am disgusted in this election. From the start I just didn't connect with any of the candidates. Changes need to be made to our election process and they were needed yesterday."

Currently the Chief Justice position is elected by a plurality vote which means the person who has the most votes at the end of the voting period wins. Some voters have brushed this off to the latest trial which experts have predicted turned possible candidates off from running. "The Milograd trial was frightening. We need to do away with the Court system." shouted another voter while picketing outside of the election center.

One election commissioner told SPINN that the commission is still holding out for a bigger turnout. "We have taken measures to ensure all eligible voters are aware of the ongoing election and are hoping we have a bigger turnout. We have only had about 17% of the eligible voters at this time. Projections for this election were holding strong at a 30% turnout."

SPINN asked one legislator if we could see changes to the election process after the conclusion of these elections and they replied "I think it is possible however not likely. We have a Special Election for Delegate also getting ready to kick off with a slightly different system and depending on how that goes could determine the future of our election system. Right now we are facing discussions about the Judicial Branch and if what we have is working. Almost everyone is in agreement that change is needed but just aren't sure what needs changed yet. If I had to make a prediction I would lean towards the Judicial System itself getting another overhaul."

We will continue to cover the story as it develops and continue to update as time goes on. SPINN wants to hear from you though. What do you think has caused the lack of interest in this election? How can it be fixed? The best answers will appear and updated article.



Click here to view the article

[Kris Kringle]

It would be positive to establish a limit for abstentions. If that limit was reached, for instance 60%, another election would be needed. That could be an option, as it is not positive for our democracy to have officials elected with a proportion as low as just 16% of just those who voted in the first place.

[Escade]

I just don't know any of the candidates (from RMB, IRC, or even forum posts) and therefore can't get a sense of them. Phlontopia is the only one who tried to "campaign" for the position in terms of answering voter questions and concerns.  I just don't feel a connection to him\her so it's hard to vote when you think that the best of the candidates is a wild card or "meh, whatevs."


Then, some voters\citizens might not know what the Chief Justice does (as in more regular tasks than the Milograd coup trial) or what was required for the position (base stats) to consider running.


Finally, with the Delegate election a lot of people may be unsure of the importance of this election in terms of how it influences the Delegate or maybe if the Delegate later appoints their own Chief Justice.


I still am not sure there should be an election with such apathy (at least 10 abstains at my last check!) or if we should wait a while and let the new Delegate redraw the Chief Justice position\nomination process a few weeks down the road.  Maybe discuss it more on the RMB and forum posts.



 

[Hileville]

I am thinking back to when I first joined TSP and I don't recall any election ever like this.  I think everyone is in agreement that something will need to change but right now we do need to work within the system we have.  So with no legal RON option in this election we get what we get.  I also as I think back don't remember an election with this many candidates besides the December 2011 Special Delegate election.

 

I am very disappointed in the turnout so far though.  We have 119 citizens that can vote in this and of those and we are only at 19 voting on the most recent poll update.  That isn't good and I think we need to look into how to improve that turnout.  The number would have been higher but the Cabinet just chopped off some 40+ heads for breaking the citizenship laws.

 

EDIT:  I feel obligated to add that this is good voting turnout for us number wise.  Although we were previously operating with a much lower amount of total citizens.

[Iro]

Why isn't RON-ing an option here? I am plainly dissatisfied with my choices and there's no way to change the fact that the dipsh!t with the one or two votes of himself and his cronies will assume the most powerful judicial office in the region. Something needs to change.

 

[Hileville]

RON was only previously an option when just 1 candidate ran.  Now it has been completely left out of the CoL.  Admittedly that was an oversight on my part.

[Iro]

The problem is, I don't want to abstain. I want to say no, and that's why a no confidence vote is so precious in TSP.

 

Why are CJ elections plurality? If they were majority, this wouldn't happen.

WE <b>W</b>ANT OTHER OPTIONS.

[HEM]

The candidates do leave quite a bit to be desired.

[Kris Kringle]

Part of the problem is that no candidate made serious attempts to campaign for office or to explain why they should be elected. We had plagiarism to begin with, another candidate just said as his platform that he would serve the people like that was a suitable platform for a Chief Justice candidate, another one didn't even answer the questions that citizens made to him.


Like HEM said, quite a bit was left to be desired, both in terms of turnout as well as with the commitment and interest that candidates showed to the office they were running for in the first place.

[Letoilenoir]

I have to agree with Escade, the role and duties of the office are not clearly defined or if they, are they are not displayed in a location that is readily accessible.

 

Perhaps situations like this need a higher profile - perhaps the landing page for the forum could be temporarily changed during these events so that such elections take centre stage, effectively making them Front page news,combining a description of the office, the issues and ramifications of the post, the platforms of the candidates and any editorials relevant to it all in one place - perhaps even a takeover of the portal page? More publicity for such important matters is clearly needed

 

There is also the question of participation - if you have a limited pool of  "citizens" with a high proportion of them disengaged it calls into question the value of making citizenship a condition of voting - if they are unwilling to participate then what is the value of having them.

 

Finally there is the question of timing - although I have received the invite to vote I am ineligible to due to the 7 day "cooling off" period required for new citizens - surely if people are prepared to jump through the hoops and comply with the requirements for citizenship they should be permitted to use it as soon as it has been granted?

 

There has been a large influx of such applications of late from people obviously keen to take part who have been told they have been accepted yet now find that they are effectively powerless to do so

 

I can understand excluding somebody from the voting process if they apply after an election is announced, and therefore may have have questionable motivation, but to exclude citizens from participation when an election has been called after they have been granted citizenship could lead them to question the benefits of joining, and this may lead to a perception that the process is not as transparent and the elected officials not represented as promised