• TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The alternative is voter suppression, which leads to unequal access. Also, given that more passionate individuals are gonna seek out a ballot vs. others, the result is going to be skewed in favor of those passionate people regardless of their understanding of reality or truthfullness.

    • Thatsalotofpotatoes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I admit it might help the current problem, since people less passionate about the issues might be less inclined to vote for reactionaries, but I don’t think the result would be better representation. Most likely the result would be a system that leans even heavier on marketing to get brand recognition for the party to the most people

      • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        We already have a system like that in the US. Whoever has a wider reach and/or higher budget gets more turnout. A big reason why Obama won was because of his presence on social media, and Trump won because of the insane amount of media coverage he has. The current system gives prederence to voters who treat elections like simple popularity contests, whereas mandatory voting would force people who somewhat pay attention to current events and not to campaigns to be counted.