Contention Three People deserve a fair choice
As many neg cases will note, the right not to vote can be important and wise if no candidate suits one’s fancy. But a major reason this scenario repeatedly plays out is due to voluntary voting. The problem with any kind of voluntary voting system is that because people have the option of not voting and spending their time elsewhere, much of the battle becomes about getting people to vote. And as Norman Ornstein of the New York Times elucidates, that means rabid partisanship—divisiveness played out fiercely on apolitical stage. That results in an unjustly broken paradigm facing democratic states a populace that is largely moderate asked to select between extremist candidates. In being conducive to such a reality, voluntary voting systems artificially create an untenable and unfair set of options for voters, who must live in a reality divergent from their political inclinations. The fairness of an election is contingent upon the idea that people are given a fair choice. If a candidate is elected without voters having a fair choice in who is elected, the government loses legitimacy—the
|
