A Fresh Perspective

I’m prompted to write this by the Democrat Convention in the US.

We had an election in the UK last December. At that election, I spoiled my ballot, because I didn’t rate any candidate. I was uneasy doing this, I thought about it afterwards. My conclusion that we’re stuck with our political system, we don’t have an option just to walk away and let them get on with it, and the only way we can improve our lot is from the inside.

So I decided that I should probably take part in future ballots. But I’m still left with the problem that none of the candidates was any good. So, who should I vote for?

I reconciled this by turning it on its head. I have to stop looking for the most suitable candidate, but for the least unsuitable.

The implication of this is that even if the candidate I voted for gets elected, there’ll still be things I’m unhappy with. So, I’ll still end up wanting better, even though I supported them. But there we go – nobody is perfect.

Anybody else who maybe is faced with some bad election candidates, maybe that’s an option? Instead of looking for the best candidate, and being disappointed (because none of them are much good), to think instead in terms of the least worst candidate?

Author: Mister Bump UK

Designed/developed large IT systems, interrupted by a stroke in 2016, aged 48. Now mix development of health-related software with voluntary work and writing. Married, with an estranged daughter.

29 thoughts on “A Fresh Perspective”

  1. Of course I do not vote in the UK, lost my chance many years ago to keep my vote, and in any case it would not be fair as I do not have to live there and put up with it. In Switzerland we have a system called “panachieren” or something like that. You have various lists for the parties, but if you would prefer someone belonging to another party, you can add him to your party list, but must naturally remove one of those on your party list. You cannot just add others, but must remove someone. Hope I have explained that well. I think it is quite a good idea. That way you give everyone a chance.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Referendums are OK, but sometimes it gets a litle too much for every small detail. My favourite one however, was to let the cows keep their horns, from a farmer that wanted his cows to grow up like proper cows and not have the horns removed when they did not even realise they would grow. I voted to let them keep the horns, but the majority found it better without. Such a disappointment for me. Keeping out of the EU was also the result of a referendum.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. If it is something you consider “small”, can you just not vote? I think that there should be a certain turnout, for a vote to be binding.
          I was very critical of the EU vote here because the question was worded such as to leave tremendous ambiguity. Did “out” mean “out of the single market” etc. That could have been handled so much better. So I think the questions you ask need a lot of thought.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. No-one has to vote in our Kanton, it is all a matter of your conscience and choice. We usually do and I think most Swiss just vote out of habit. It is a way of life here. Referendums are mostly Kanton voting, not national, and you are voting for local events., although if you collect enough signatures, you can also bring a referendum for a national issue. My No. 2 son lives in the Kanton of Schffhausen and there they have a law that fines you if you do not vote for local issues, although just a symbolic five francs to pay. It is the only Kanton where it applies, it was once decided in a referendum. What I like is that we really have a direct democracy, although with a population of just 8 million Swiss, including the cows, it works.

            Liked by 1 person

        1. Yeah, Brexit was a very good example. I think there were tenable arguments on both sides, but those arguments were lost in the hysteria. Even now, it is written into our law that there will be complete separation at the end of the year, unless something is agreed. And it is now August…

          Liked by 1 person

          1. A few years ago I saw a TV report: a British journalist interviewed some people who live in a town in Wales – I don’t remember which one – asking them why they wanted Brexit: they all replied “because the European Union has never done anything for us” . Then the journalist showed them that many public buildings in their town had been built thanks to EU funding. Nobody knew.

            Liked by 2 people

  2. So-called ‘democratic’ voting systems are badly broken. In my opinion the way to fix this is to allow a vote for ‘none of the above’, a win for which would oblige an intense investigation into the reasons why the majority are disillusioned with the available parties/ candidates, followed by a restructuring of the voting process to attempt to correct the flaw(s).

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I think that is the exact reasons why politicoes do not want “none of the above”. Because without that, they can claim to have the backing of the majority. In the Eighties, they used to publish the number of spoiled ballots. I noticed last time around that they don’t. I’m sure it is for the same reason.

      Liked by 1 person

              1. Yes it can.
                I have my own reasons.
                A minor reason is that I have family members serving in government.
                But a major reason is that the charities I have worked with are strictly politically neutral in order to be able to get into lands that need help. The moment you start taking sides, doors close. We need to be completely separated from politics. Therefore it is important not to be associated with any party or political figure. But we will of course pay taxes owed and cooperate with laws, requirements for licences etc. It is incredible how much political and judicial corruption we have to navigate in some lands. But if we were to open our mouth and speak against a ruler…we would be out. So we could not help the people who need the most help.

                Liked by 1 person

  3. The UK charities are the same. The primary goal is “don’t rock the boat”. Any government worth it’s salt should be able to take criticism on board, but I know what you mean. I’m careful to say that I don’t speak on the charity’s behalf but if push came to shove, the politics would stay and the charity would go.
    Politics often comes up when I talk to clients – this schools fiasco was a popular subject this week.


  4. I am in the US and my Father would always get upset w/ me because i would never bot. He would say what if it came down to one vote that made the difference? I guess I can see this except in the voting for President. My problem w/ the way we vote for President is that no matter who we vote for ultimately it comes down to the electoral college. In my mind if a vote is going to be for or against someone then the ACTUAL # of popular votes should determine the winners

    Despite all this I did vote 2016 and I will vote this time, but I still find it is just a way to make Americans feel they are having a choice in their future leader.

    Not to mention I am jaded and I believe every politician can be bought for the right price or arrangement. No matter what ethnicity, religious beliefs,sexuality or political party.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I adree that probably the top of somebody’s list should be making the system fairer, but there is a Catch 22 that somebody can only do that if they first beat the current system.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.