If someone who is able to get to a polling station to vote does not do so, it will be for one of two reasons. The first is that they deliberately stay away because they are unimpressed by any of the candidates or parties, they feel the result is a foregone conclusion or something similar. That is their right, and it is up to the parties and the politicians to raise the standard to entice them back.
The other is that they are too idle or apathetic to bother.
Am I the only one who feels that if someone who is physically able to do so, can't be bothered to get up off their backsides to get to a polling station they don't deserve a vote? Why is it even being contemplated to bring the vote to them, via postal votes, textphone, internet or telephone so they can vote without effort? Did the campaigners of the nineteenth and early-twentieth century fight for universal suffrage just so the lazy could say, "I'll vote if it's brought to me, but not if I have to go out?" And, in any case, how much attention have these people paid to the campaigns in the run-up to the election?
The vote is precious, the electors are, after all, choosing the government - local or national. What is wrong with confining it to those who are willing to go to vote?
We should return to giving postal votes only to those unable to get to a polling station, either because they are disabled or away from home on election day, and leave telephone and internet voting to Big Brother evictions.
Dallas Carter, 117 Calder Tower, Motherwell.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article