It may not be an original idea of mine – anymore, who can have an original idea? But I got to thinking, at first as a joke, but then began to put serious consideration to this –
What if we put a “none of the above” option on the ballot? And if the total number of votes for none of the above exceed legitimate votes, then would it be reasonable to kick out the candidates and call a new election.
I think this is actually a very good idea because most everyone (not limited to the right wing or the libertarians) has been very dissatisfied with the candidates in the past few elections.
Who with a straight face could actually say they supported Mitt Romney whole heartedly? John McCain? Most everyone supported the candidates because it would be better than the alternative. (Would it have been? We will never know.)
And I think that the democrats were becoming somewhat dissatisfied with Obama in the last election. Not completely, but there was some wiggle room as compared to ’08.
Not just nationally, but in every election. For instance, in the upcoming Oklahoma governor race, a major issue is storm cellars for schools, to prevent the loss of lives during disasters such as the May 20th tornado. Both candidates (and in a future post I hope to put more thoughts on this subject) have a plan to raise funds for them – both of them place an added burden on an already fragile economy. So why not a “none of the above?”
So really, is a “none of the above” option on the ballot that unreasonable? No. But I know better. It’s sensible and there’s a ban on sensibility in this nation.