Points to remember before you participate in this discussion:
|Hdubey said: (Oct 1, 2018)|
|According to me, Nota is make for that people who have no option to choose best candidate in their place but it's drawback also that in India corrupt candidates win election because people use Nota.|
|Lavanyamohan said: (Sep 25, 2018)|
|India is a democratic country.
So, everyone has rights to express our interest to nota& another think has decently opposed the parties.
|Arushi said: (Sep 21, 2018)|
|I think NOTA is a better way to prove democracy in India but in some terms, it is lagging. Even if 99 votes are for NOTA out of 100 and 1 vote is for the candidate X, then X is declared the winner. In India, firstly people are not even aware of NOTA and even if they are, votes to NOTA are counted as "invalid votes". There could be the real use of NOTA in a democracy only when the candidates are disqualified after majority votes are cast to NOTA and the re-elections take place with new candidates because citizens have already disapproved of the existing candidates. THAT WOULD MAKE INDIA DEMOCRATIC IN REAL SPIRIT!|
|Bhajan Singh said: (Sep 17, 2018)|
|First of all I would like to appreciate election commission for introducing this option. My main purpose is to add the value of this option (ie. NOTA). In case votes casted towards this option are to be treated as rejected votes, then using of this option has no use. As per my opinion the results of this option must have solid wattage. In the long run the definition of democracy has been changed by some selected politicians. The real definition of democracy was treating equally to every citizen of the state. Thus, states of democracy were considered as soverign states. Now the democracy has been changed to dictatorship (biorocracy). I feel that option NOTA provided by election commission in the bottom of electronic vellot paper will improve the structure of democracy, if it is used and accessed with letter and spirits.|
|Dhananjay Sarangi said: (Sep 12, 2018)|
|This is Dhananjay.
Today topic should voters be given nota Choice?
I would say yes. India is a democratic country means "everyone has the equal right to elect their leader". We also have the right to choose the person whom we want to be the leader. If the desired person criteria will not meet with the given options, then the NOTA option must be there. It indirectly will prove that those people who are standing in the election, must have some fault.
For instance, if NOTA option will not be there, then we have to select any one option (maybe the person whom we don't want to elect). These minor things will definitely lead our country's future to an unpredictable state.
NOTA option must be there.
|Vikhil Karthi said: (Sep 4, 2018)|
In my point of view, NOTA option is very good because if we get 35% of NOTA votes then both the candidates are not eligible for the election and candidates must be changed.
|Sahil said: (Aug 28, 2018)|
|I think no.
Nota is only waste of the right to vote.
Nota means a doll in the hand of fools.
If in a constituency the no. Of total vote is 100 and 80 people vote for Nota and rest 20 vote are devided in two candidates getting 12 and 8 votes respectively, then the candidate who got 12 votes will win.
It means the total 80 vote get waste.
It's a bad concept. There will be no meaning of democracy in such system.
|Mohan Kumar said: (Aug 24, 2018)|
|Yes, I too agree, that NOTA is a good way for voting if we don't want to give the vote to anyone. Then we can choose Nota as per our CHOICE.|
|Payal said: (Aug 22, 2018)|
|Yes, NOTA should be given as an option to the voters. Generally, if a person doesn't like any of the people who is a candidate in the election, that person is forced to give a vote against his/her choice and willingness. So, it is a kind of creates pressure on them to vote. So, voting options should be open-ended just like a research questionnaire.|
|Ann said: (Aug 6, 2018)|
|I Think Our Voting System should contain Nota. By this we will know whether the people are satisfied with the participants, if no of voters voting for nota is more then we should change the participants and by this, we know how much people are satisfied and not satisfied with the participants.|
|Shubham Kaushik said: (Jul 8, 2018)|
|No, NOTA should not be given according to my point of view. NOTA is simply waste of vote, if a person is selecting NOTA then that person is equivalent to that person who doesn't go for VOTING resulting wastage of vote in both cases.|
|Pankaj S B said: (Mar 14, 2018)|
|It costs money and time both, but will give right leader, they will bring good change and development in future.|
|Karan Jain said: (Dec 26, 2017)|
I feel that Nota should not be provided for voters. It has been 2 years since the nota have been provided and only 2 % of the votes go for Nota. So it eventually has no impact and incases Nota wins.
There will be re-election which will only waste time and money.
|Deepika said: (Dec 17, 2017)|
|No, voters should not be given NOTA choice, because if everyone go for this choice in votings, then definitely no political party will come in the country. And there will be 99% chance of coming military raj in the country. Also the money wasted on the elections will be of no use. This was started for the benefit of people but I think that this may also go against the benefit of public.|
|Binoy said: (Oct 22, 2017)|
|If NOTA is made available than it will create unnecessary chaos. Conducting an election needs huge amount of money and if re-elections are done than huge amount of public money is wasted with time. So I would suggest that vote for the right person who will bring the change.|
|Faraz said: (Sep 26, 2017)|
|Yes, NOTA option should be available as we are democratic public and have all rights to cast out opinion, if NOTA candidate got maximum votes it means simply election commission and parties should choose candidates again who are potential and philanthropists as most of the time candidates get ticket on behalf of offering huge amount of money to parties, it will cater corruption and malpractices especially who has criminal records and want to wash off hands through politics.
Again and re-election might create time gap and delay in administration so it should allow either twice or thrice.
This option will put pressure for parties if they won't work better then nobody will go for them.
Major of public 20-30% don't cast vote every year cause political leaders are actually not shaping Indian growth in the right way and we lost.
Partially our trust in bureaucracy so this step will be more effective.
|Sneha said: (Sep 21, 2017)|
|We live in a democratic country everyone has their own choice. If someone thinks that none of is capable of being any post for that NOTA is must be there.|
|Vedant Gupta said: (Aug 28, 2017)|
|According to me, the NOTA option should be given to the voters and also treated like a candidate in the election. If the NOTA option wins the election then the Election Commission should take necessary steps against the candidates who were standing in the election from that seat. It will not only improve the transparency in the elections but also ensure that the most deserving, dedicated and popular candidates contest the election.|
|Jithin R said: (Aug 25, 2017)|
|No need of that in fact if someone doesn't want to give a vote for candidates why should he go for voting.|
|Amit said: (Aug 10, 2017)|
|Yes, I think voters should be a given a choice as NOTA at the time of elections. Most of the candidates who stand for votes in an election are corrupt, disqualified that's why our country is behind countries like Japan, china etc. If people think none of the candidates is suitable to give votes, then NOTA will be their choice. If votes on NOTA is more than 75%, then the government would be forced to take necessary steps against the candidate who stands up for elections. Most of the candidates who are puppets of some political parties would then fear to stand for elections.
For a developing country like India, it is vital that a candidate should be qualified and have the potential to make our country free of corruption, poor, illiteracy etc.
|Pawan said: (Aug 6, 2017)|
|With Nota, people will not do anything about politicians. Because if they use Nota I mean they not like any candidate. There is no effect on any party.|
|Devang Talaviya said: (Jul 9, 2017)|
|Yes, I think it gives to people. Because when leaders are not good then people have to choose to give the vote in NOTA. It also uses full for knowing the image of leaders.|
|Rajat said: (Jul 6, 2017)|
|Yes, it is right to give an option of NOTA because in today's tine everything includes in the limit of politics. If there is a mishappening is their, political party arguing each other without know the exact reason behind the scenario. Today's politics is totally based on appeasement which is not good for the communal harmony of the country and people also censure it but people have no choice to change it. If NOTA is regulated then the political parties also realise and thinks for the betterment of people and they must focus on the development of the country.|
|Santosh Bhatt said: (Jun 21, 2017)|
|Yes, I agree with this. Because from many years the campaign by the political leaders was like traditional marketing. They started to think that what they present, people will choose. But in the soul of heart of the people was not interested to accept this type of politics but they had no chance. So most of them started to neglect to vote. Therefore, the democracy started became weak. But now when people have the chance to vote obviously for nobody but for democracy. So, the voters should be given a NOTA.|
|Shivam Amoli said: (Jun 14, 2017)|
|Yes, NOTA is given to voters for option. It will be a great dicision towards the awareness of voters to our poltics. Some youngsters don't like any candidate in elections and we say that they don't like politics. So they give NOTA option in election just to say that none them is able to compete election.|
|Laxminarayan Gehlot said: (Jun 4, 2017)|
|As per my view, NOTA is good step to change the mind set of people towards democracy. In India, people not able to stand in elections only those people stand who got it by their forefathers and we can't stop them. By NOTA if 70% and above votes in favour of NOTA than it mean there are no right candidate in the election. It is a good way to show our disagreement towards the government. On the basis of this govt takes the eligibility of the corrupt candidate and doesn't give chance again.|
|Salman said: (May 28, 2017)|
|As of now, when no importance is given to NOTA, it doesn't make any sense in selecting that option. As one of my mates raised a point that if there are 100 people in a locality, 80 people are going to exercise their votes (most probably). Now, if 30 people among those 80 select the NOTA option, there won't be any healthy competition between the candidates. As a matter of fact, we all know that everyone is corrupted in the system, now the only option we have is to choose the least corrupted one. Summing up in a nutshell one should not waste his vote by selecting NOTA.|
|Soniya Choudhary said: (May 25, 2017)|
|Yes, As my opinion, voters should be given a NOTA choice because the negative point is also crucial to evaluate the best candidate for the country. It will give an outlook onto politician to the government. As well as those people who don't wanna give their votes to anyone because according to them all are corrupted here. For them, it will be a good way to show their disappointment. The NOTA votes will depict that how many people are disappointed and displeasure with government work.
So according to me, it's necessary to make a good government.
|Amar Kumar said: (Apr 29, 2017)|
|Yes, voters should be given a NOTA choice,
Even NOTA option would not impact the results of the elections. The NOTA options on EVMs has no electoral value. If the maximum number of votes cast is for NOTA, the candidate getting the most of the remaining votes would be declared a winner. Still, NOTA is a good choice because negative votes show that no one candidate is good or clean. All candidates are involved in corruption. Due to negative votes political party force to opt clean candidates for election.
|Yaseen said: (Apr 22, 2017)|
|Yes, voter should be given Nota option to choose. It will certainly disqualify the corrupted candidates. Having over 50% Nota should lead to re-election and the candidates should not be allowed to contest anymore.|
|Abhishek Gupta 4244 said: (Mar 25, 2017)|
|Yes, I agree.
NOTA is just a way so that people can have a choice to express their Bad opinions if any of all the candidates of all d parties and Select the best one for their region.
|Aditi said: (Mar 21, 2017)|
|No, I am not in the favor that NOTA option should be in the electric voting machine. It has no significance I think, it is just the option which makes people choose none of the above candidate, who are not capable of being a good leader ahead, or who will not be able to make state or country a good economy.
- Many of the people choose the NOTA option. Apart from this, they know that if the NOTA is given 70% votes and the rest got the left 30% votes, then the candidate who got just 30% of the total votes will be the winner. Then what is the overall effect?- Nothing. By choosing NOTA, the voters only shows their angriness and dis-satisfaction about the elected candidate. There is nothing happen if the option NOTA is made in the voting machine.
|Aadi Chikhale said: (Mar 10, 2017)|
|1. Sometimes voter hopes to that person who really care about them and who make something for general people.
2. But sometimes voter gives vote only for NOTA.
3. SO I concluded all voters are not same that's why we can't say it's wrong. Finally, it's all depends on priority.
4. I think who really change N develop our status those requirements. Vite.
|Neha said: (Mar 5, 2017)|
I think voters should be given a NOTA choice because it shows the candidates that some people just don't find them correct candidate that they can really do something for citizens. It is necessary option to add NOTA choice to voters.
|Nicky said: (Mar 2, 2017)|
|My opinion is that NOTO is best way to express their dissent against all the contestants.|
|Vinod Sao said: (Feb 20, 2017)|
|The highest NOTA voted candidate should be barred to participate in next election.|
|Giriraj Kumar said: (Jan 23, 2017)|
|I am writing against the motion, that NOTA shouldn't be an alternative in elections, reasons been:
1. If someone is not supporting anyone in the elections, then he/she can opt for NOTA. But who would care to stand in long queues, just to opt for NOTA. He/She could simply skip the election and won't come to vote. In this manner also, he/she is indirectly supporting NOTA. Besides this, such activity will degrade the active participation of voters in elections.
2. Cost of conducting elections is too high, moreover the inconvenience caused to voters can't be ignored. If NOTA is there then, there are chances that no candidate will emerge as a winner, and the elections will have to be conducted again. Imagine the loss in terms of money and time if this scenario is repeated more than once.
3. NOTA option may be taken as a fun option for many people. They will cast their vote to NOTA just for their entertainment. It will lead to unfair voting process.
4. Providing NOTA will not encourage people to listen to the proposals of the candidate who's going to contest the elections. The voter may have an advanced mindset to remain neutral and hence, will discourage active participation of voters in elections.
|Alok Mishra said: (Jan 17, 2017)|
|Hey I am Alok Mishra for NOTA MY OPINION IS THAT IT IS NECESSARY TO ALL VOTERS. IT IS THE best way to using their rights.|
|Monika said: (Jan 9, 2017)|
|Well, yes. Voters should be given a NOTA choice. It provides the right to the voter to show their dissent towards the contesting candidates that they are not suitable for the election. Moreover NOTA choice doesn't make the vote cast as invalid. It counts the vote as valid and makes it difficult for the inefficient candidate to win.
Let's suppose total votes cast are 1,000. Out of which 150 are cast as NOTA. And rest are cast for different candidates with no clear majority. Then earlier for candidate A to win he need to get majority of 850 votes as NOTA votes were considered as invalid. But now he had to get majority out of 1000 votes.
|Isha said: (Dec 28, 2016)|
|Free A Billion: www.freeabillion.com.
Find strategy behind NOTA, Find how can Accountability, Transparency can change the entire political scenario. We changed rulers till now and what happened? why not change rules in stead? we are still backed by British empowered laws.
|Shikhar Patel(Bms,Kmv,Du) said: (Dec 4, 2016)|
|Well, I think so that NOTA should be given to the people not just because it says disapproval to all candidates but in the future perspective it could make a firm decision regarding selection of candidates of various political parties. This would force the political parties to change their candidates and make cleaner politics. Second, and most important this would give the clear picture of the people perspective of the country.|
|Appu said: (Nov 20, 2016)|
|To me, NOTA is a suitable option for the people. Though it is against the democratic rights not to vote. Some of them will have their own perception on the election agendas and candidature. We must not question one's beliefs. NOTA is the finest method to show one's strong disapproving against the election methodologies.|
|Ndm said: (Nov 3, 2016)|
|According to my opinion, NOTA option should be available because in case citizen does not want any of the nominees to be selected then they can choose NOTA option. After that new candidates should be selected for election. I know it will take time but still a good leader will be selected.|
|Isha Maheshwari said: (Oct 27, 2016)|
|According to me, voters should get NOTA choice because as we people know that in elections all the citizens are allowed to participate so poor are mostly never getting the facilities that they expect from the candidate. In our parliamentary system poor and low caste peoples opinions have no special value so if they will complain, then also no action will be taken on their opinion. So if there will be NOTA choice they will be satisfied with their vote and they will not feel bad.|
|Anny said: (Oct 17, 2016)|
|The NOTA choice for voters seems to be the favorable option for some of the citizens who actually understands about NOTA because if a citizen doesn't find any of the party fit to be their representatives for them than they have the particular option of NOTA to select. Besides all these negative views, apart from saying that I won't fit best, we must take this initiative to its next level by understanding that it is actually a need of our country to understand what a voter wants. I think it's an initial step for a far political vision by thinking about the voting procedure of our country and how we can raise it to the next level by adding some new useful techniques and tools like NOTA. And let the other parties understand where they are lacking. As our country support and follows the FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS which depicts a personal /individual preference also matters. Freedom of thought is there in our country then why a voter will not avail these options! Our government must aware the citizens about these changes that takes place within various intervals that how it can or can not be beneficial for them. This will help them in clearing the picture of politics as well as of politicians. And it will somehow bring transparency too.|
|Vasi said: (Oct 5, 2016)|
|As per my view, NOTA is good but there should be some changes in policy.
The winning candidate at least should get 55% of vote.
The loser not eligible to nominate in next election (it's make the candidate to fear that if they do not perform well or not get good opinion of people they may get rejected and they even won't able to nominate in next election which also reduces their popularity).
The place where majority of NOTA have registered should come under the control of governor and it should monitor properly by central government to avoid override.
The budget for state should allot by central government.
Since it's a democratic country, governor rule should not be there for long period. But incase of NOTA if the majority of people not interested on none of nominated person they may choose the governor rule (they may have an election after four years).
Incase of state election if the particular district chooses NOTA it should come under the control of governor and budget fund allot (budget allotment committee should form to rule on what base the budget can allot) on bases of the development process and population to avoid of cornering by state.
|Sai said: (Sep 21, 2016)|
|I think for the current situation the choice of NOTA is required because people are given chances to expose their thoughts regarding the ruling party indirectly. If none got selected it should involve the participation of new persons those who really has the capability to rule the nation.|
|Prithvi Raj said: (Sep 14, 2016)|
|Suppose if NOTA has got higher votes than any other person above it, then re-election will take place.
But then the same members will stand for the election & automatically one will win.
All though the NOTA states that "None Of The Above", what is the use of it. Time is waste, money is waste.
I think government must make some changes, whenever we get the higher number of votes for NOTA. Then we can see some changes in our society. Hope something happens in next election.
|Aman Gupta said: (Sep 11, 2016)|
Although NOTA may prove a good way to express one's dissatisfaction towards the participating candidates in an election but on practical grounds, this scheme may even worsen the present situation because of the following reasons.
1) In Indian democracy where the majority of votes are disposed on the basis of religion, caste or creed. The NOTA votes (in the minority) in a poll may count for nothing and even a candidate rejected with more than half of voters may win the election.
2) If the NOTA votes are in majority then the re-election process will occur which will obviously cost some time and money but that is not a permanent solution of the problem as a similar type of situation may raise again and again.
The root cause of such situation in our nation is the participation of unworthy candidates in an election which can be only solved by employing a proper system for shortlisting candidates having certain clauses such as no criminal background, or a psychometric test for judging mentality, personality, intelligence etc.
|Khushi said: (Aug 21, 2016)|
|My point is, If many of them or the majority of them used NOTA then there will be no ruling party.|
|Jass said: (Aug 16, 2016)|
|NOTA is the best option when we are like to give vote any candidate because if we will press NOTA button then we given the vote to NOTA . Anybody will not miss him I'd proof for giving the vote to other candidate.|
|Naveen Godara said: (Aug 15, 2016)|
|I do think that, a country like India, Logically NOTA is the only option which would be chosen most if the Voters cast their vote truly. But under social and political circumstances they tap on someone not liable.
Every candidate is unfit for one or another citizen because of their different mentality about Politicians.
|Debasish said: (Aug 11, 2016)|
|NOTA should be applied against uncontest candidate as well. Few rich people in our area selected their candidate from criminal background and not giving chance to any opponent. NOTA is best if applicable in our area.|
|Gandhi Bhomik said: (Aug 4, 2016)|
|Yes, I think that there should be options of NOTA then the voter should have a chance that if the voter is not like to vote that all candidate then he can vote on None of the above and save his/her vote that any body can not use his vote.
I appeal to all that whenever there is a voting go and please vote if you don't like the candidates then vote to NOTA.
|Avdhesh Pareek said: (Jul 23, 2016)|
|I think we should find any other alternative. Because in India 50 to 60 % people go for voting so after selection process is not fair. So we should try our rural people more encourage to participate in voting.|
|Raj said: (Jul 23, 2016)|
|I strongly feel that voters should not be given a any of the above choices. This would be proportional to not casting a vote. This would mean we are avoiding our fundamental duties. Even if we are given a none of the above choices, eventually one among the remaining participants would get selected. This means that we did not utilize our right to vote.
Instead, we should come forward and take active participation. This does not mean we get into politics. We.
Should enquire about our local candidate. If he is inactive and indulging in wrong activities then we should bring the matter known to the higher officials.
This way we could practice our democratic rights efficiently.
|Mohit Shukla said: (Jul 22, 2016)|
|Yes, and the reason behind is it is the way candidates are selected by different parties.
In, democracy, we have freedom to choose our leader and for that elections are held periodically and at the different level of governance, but the way candidates are selected by major political parties is hazardous to the spirit of the democracy. They tend to file those candidates who can influence the results with their money and muscle power. They tend to select the candidates on the basis of their caste and religion, not on the basis of their competencies.
To eradicate this we must have an option which enables our voters to challenge the candidacy of all the candidates if they are not satisfied by all of them.
But there is a glitch in the current provision of NOTA which must be eradicated so that it can serve as the major democratic check by the voter. As per now, if NOTA comes out to be the prime choice of the voters then candidate which is second to it will be declared as the winner, such provisions end up the purpose which is to be served by it. It will be much effective when the election in that constituency will be declared as void and followed by a re-election in which all the contestants who had fought earlier will not be allowed to take part again.
|Madhusudan said: (Jun 22, 2016)|
|Yes implementing NOTA would be a great idea. This will ensure that people are not forced to elect someone just for the sake of it. On the other hand, politicians, knowing that people have one more option of NOTA, will improve their governance because of the added competition and fear off re-election. If only one party is worth voting for just because other parties are worse, then the party would be rest assured that it had no competition at all which resulted in their bad governance and ignorance for development.|
|Ruturaj Pradhan said: (Jun 22, 2016)|
|I think NOTA option is not required in our election system because our voting system is such that our people have voted (including educated urban people) as per the national or state face of the political parties rather than their local candidate. So if in certain constituency a corrupt candidate stands election for the certain political party but if that political party has a good face in national level then in this situation this corrupt candidate won the election.
Some of have confusion that if a maximum number of the vote goes to NOTA then what happen?
This type of situation never occur because in Indian election voting pattern is such that in a constituency (including urban constituency) nearly 95% of peoples are vote for major political parties & rest of are vote for other smaller political parties, an independent candidate, NOTA etc.
In India NOTA is available in EVM machine from 2 years. From this 2 years, NOTA are used in assembly election of 17 different states. In each state only 1-1.5% votes are goes to NOTA. In Kerela ( the most literate state in India) only 0.5% peoples ar the vote for NOTA in 2016. In Delhi (having 98% urban population) only 0.4% people are the vote for NOTA in 2015. This data clearly show that there is no interest about NOTA option among educated urban people.
Thus, at last, I will say that in Indian election system there is no significance of NOTA.
|Sainadh said: (Jun 21, 2016)|
|If we have NOTA as a part of election we will how people think about their leader.|
|Shivarshi Kumar Pushpendu said: (Jun 21, 2016)|
In my opinion providing an option of NOTA is good. First of all, it ensures our freedom of expression being living in a democratic country. Nowadays so many tainted candidates have entered in our politics, if no.of votes for NOTA is more then EC would have to reconsider about new rules and regulations for the candidate which may, in turn, provide us with a good contestant in future. Political parties will take it as an alarm and they also have to think about their candidates. Of course, a lot of money gets wasted in fresh elections but that money is not more than the money earned by the tainted candidate within 5 years by unfair means. Therefore, NOTA may also prove good for our so called WAR AGAINST CORRUPTION.
|Tanmay Sharma said: (Jun 20, 2016)|
|Hello, I am Tanmay.
My opinion says NOTA will not be the right option as,
1. NOTA absolutely take us to the worse condition i.e. Re-election which causes many factors.
2. IF any party led with the certain votes than the votes given in NOTA will be a waste.
Rather than giving the votes to the other party who we think is better, because that vote will be utilized.
|Himanshu Rawat said: (Jun 18, 2016)|
|As INDIA is a democratic country, therefore all Indians have right to elect their representatives. How so ever if any voter could not find in his opinion suitable candidate, then NOTA shall be used.
This not only reduces chances of worst representative selection but also provokes for re-election.
|Rohit Kumar said: (Jun 18, 2016)|
As we know India is a democratic country and every people have their own rights choice so why not in election scenario.
NOTA choice should be there so that people can give msg to election parties that your candidates are not able to uplift our country. It may lead to the selection of better candidates and our country foundation will be strong enough to progress.
|Sravanthi said: (Jun 15, 2016)|
|I am also in favor of NOTA because of political situation educated people are not interested in politics whereas uneducated people showing interest because of money and likes. They show there this satisfaction through NOTA.
The government should be formed based on NOTA because those are the real votes. Without giving any corruption. The people whose are not using their vote may be used for NOTA.
But NOTA must be taken that more votes than two parties but not full votes.
|Ramkishun Singh Thakur said: (Jun 15, 2016)|
|NOTA should not be included as an option because,
1) If more people supports NOTA, there might be chances of failure of election and re-election will be there which results in wasting of money and time, management problems and might be people will not come next time for voting.
2) Corruption will be more as if corrupted candidates try to put poor peoples in their favour.
And even if there is only less number of people's involve in voting, chances of winning of the corrupted candidate will be more.
3) One candidate should be there to rule a territory, but in case of NOTA, there might be chances that no candidate select by common peoples and require re-election.
4) Not give a deserving candidate.
5) Because of distribution of votes, less no.of votes represent true candidate which might result in false selection.
6) In India, most of the peoples are poor and illiterate, mostly in village, are unaware of results of NOTA,
7) If NOTA is there, then it is similar to non-voting, (voting is to choose any candidate).
|Ranjan Kumar Mishra said: (Jun 14, 2016)|
|NOTA is an extra advantage given by the EC to voters, it's a step to clean up the corrupt politician but this is not enough a lot of things has to be done in this area to filter, many people don't know what is parliament, assembly the seats there which party will form the government after their voting. I think EC of India researchers a mechanism in this area also.|
|Saurabh said: (Jun 13, 2016)|
|NOTA, as the name suggests, is a non-acceptance of the candidate who is currently electing thus if this is implemented with all the norms and conditions would be a great asset to the people and for the people to decline their assent to the person they deem not fit for the post.|
|Bhaskar Santhosh said: (Jun 13, 2016)|
According to my perspective, The NOTA (None of the above) should be the part of the panellist provided to the voter to elect their candidate as undeserving candidates need not be elected for developing our future. I think the NOTA should be given a privilege that if the selection of NOTA exceeded 50% of the vote then re-elections should be conducted welcoming new candidates as it proves that more than half of population are not satisfied with any of present candidates. IT can also give rise to new leaders with no corrupted minds and dreams to make India a developed country.
|Ayush said: (Jun 12, 2016)|
|Why? Why NOTA?
If someone wants "none of the above" then he/she has a choice not to go to the booth.
We'll have to modify our voting machines. Why waste our resources for nothing?
Just don't go damn it.
If the number of votes are less than half of the population then there will automatically be re-elections.
|Dgupta said: (Jun 11, 2016)|
|NOTA is not just an option but it gives or can give a picture of how our political parties choose candidates which have hardly to do with quality commitment & education and all of a candidate. Maybe not now but hopefully, in near future when people will think about politicians before giving them vote it will come very handy and reflection of this would address the parties to realize that weight on caste/money etc should be deduced.|
|Naveen M Vijay said: (Jun 10, 2016)|
Am also agree with the NOTA because every person has there on likes and dislikes. Everyone need to express their emotion through voting. In case the nota percentage will increase with persons are need to be changed. NOTA is not considered as wastage of vote. It is uplift our democracy values of our nation.
|Ashok Singh said: (Jun 9, 2016)|
|Availability of NOTA option in voting is most welcome. As the topic of discussion was whether it should be available or not, I'll confine to this only. It is required to know the number of voters not in favour of any of the candidates. If the NOTA voters are reasonably higher the political parties may be pressurised to come with a better candidate with the cleaner image and thus, the chances of quality candidates will increase. Analysis of the DATA available will enable the Election Commission / Parliament to come out to the logical conclusion by framing rules with regard to the high percentage of NOTA and treatment thereof. This will facilitate improvement in the political environment and thereby bright future of the people in a democracy.|
|Brinda Kalyan said: (Jun 9, 2016)|
|In my perspective NOTA does not have any significance in the election. Out of 100 votes when 99 votes are in favour of NOTA and remaining 1 vote is in favour of a particular party, the party holding one vote becomes the ruling government. Only when all the 100 votes are in favour of NOTA re-elections are conducted. NOTA was introduced only to know how many people does not have faith on any of the parties who are standing for the elections. Hence, NOTA does not have any significance. As discussed earlier, a person who is not interested in voting or person who does not have faith in any party will not go all the way to the voting place to press NOTA. It will have its effect only when re-elections are conducted when maximum percentage are in favour of NOTA.|
|Mayur said: (Jun 9, 2016)|
What if NOTA is used?
Because even if NOTA is used then also person having the second preference will get elected.
If we want real implication of NOTA there has to be changed in the provision made.
|Rahul Agarwal said: (Jun 9, 2016)|
|Yes, friend's I agree with NOTA option, if you think candidate are not eligible for your vote then you must vote for nota. So educated candidate selected and your country becomes developed.|
|Konika said: (Jun 9, 2016)|
|Yes, I think NOTA is a great option because a democratic government is FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, and OF THE PEOPLE, so people have full right to accept or reject a government if required, they should not be bound to choose from the choices (mostly none of them is proper) provided. Result of the votes decide the future of the state, why a person will struggle in long queues if they know whoever they choose/vote no change is going to happen and that is one of the reasons why voting participation is low and which gives opportunities to false voting which is another problem which cannot be ignored.
If NOTA is introduced people will be able to show dissatisfaction for the candidate and if the majority of people's views agree, the parties will feel bound to reconsider and to avoid further re-election it will opt for better probably more deserving candidate. Regarding the financial expenses in repeated election, one thing is sure, it's going to be much less than a corrupted leader will absorb if comes in power. In future, there are chances that parties will take all the precautions while choosing its candidate for the first time to prevent the bomb of NOTA on them.
Yes, people need to understand their responsibilities while voting even more when they have a NOTA button in front of them on the voting machine and it is also hoped that parties will take it as a lesson so that a voter will never actually have to press NOTA.
|Aishwarya said: (Jun 8, 2016)|
|NOTA is not a good option. Being a part of a secular country like India, we should be able to choose between the best alternatives. A small exam or a topic which is to be discussed before a crowd is being researched. Why cannot we take up a responsibility and research about our politicians before selecting or rejecting them? After all, voting is our inbuilt right, choosing a NOTA is equivalent to not voting. If people think that NOTA is a good option for aspiring citizens like us, then those who choose NOTA should lose their right of talking about the political system which has been created.|
|Veerareddy said: (Jun 8, 2016)|
|Yes, I will specify the option at an election. Everyone have to rights to choose the right person to develop our city or country or anything but nowadays many politicians doing around politics around India. According to my suggestion to put the NOTA option in elections in India.|
|Akshay Mangal said: (Jun 8, 2016)|
|NOTA - none of the above. As India is a democratic country we are following our constitution. Where we don't have any educational qualification or criterion to contest in an election. The only criterion we have is the age and proved criminal activity. At the same time, we see that their lacs of cases are still pending in courts. So there is no question of proved criminal activity. So as far we have only one criterion that is age. So, it is very essential to have a choice of NOTA. As all the people who are contesting may not be fit for that particular seat. As a young Indian aspirant who want to change in society, should have a right to reject all also rather than selecting one from all only.|
|Sajida said: (Jun 7, 2016)|
As a young voter of this developing country, I am in Favour of NOTA because I want to see my country as a developed country as soon as possible. And this can only happen if the deserving and educated candidates rule our country, using their skillful brains towards the betterment of our country. No body wants to waste their vote on an undeserving and ungrateful candidate. So every citizen should be given freedom to express their acceptance or denial by using NOTA.
Rome wasn't built in a day. It took time. In the same way, NOTA will take the time to uproot the corrupt politicians and free India from corruption.
|Jhalak said: (Jun 7, 2016)|
I think that NOTA is a good option with some strict conditions applied. If this option is available, people can analyse the candidate on the basis of his/her past records; the work was done by him, his criminal background, his social background etc. So, he can reject the candidate if some ambiguity prevails. Even though, I agree that conduction of re-election is a waste of resources and time because the political Parties will then also not elect candidates as per the people's interest. So, other options like conducting tests and interviews by bureaucrats could be adopted so that only educated, qualified and deserving candidates are appointed. This way corruption can also be checked.
|Alina said: (Jun 6, 2016)|
|Democracy is from/of/for the people. But every given candidate may not be suitable for power. So NOTA option is best for this situation. If the NOTA % increases. A test should be conducted to choose a new candidate, by this, we will assure that the candidate is well educated and is worth for the post.|
|Sandeep Kumar said: (Jun 3, 2016)|
Even in my point of view NOTA is the best option with some conditions apply. So, if we select NOTA then they should also select the following options:
1. Another person must be nominated by the same party for this post.
2. I am not interested in voting to any of the candidates.
So, if option 1 is chosen in NOTA then the party should select another responsible person and we can go for re-elections if NOTA (option 1) % is more.
If option 2 is chosen then the present person who is in charge will again take his position if NOTA (option 2) % is more.
This could add value to the option NOTA.
|Prathamesh said: (Jun 3, 2016)|
Most of you are in favor of NOTA and I am also in favor of NOTA but the problem is that who will run the government after the majority give votes to NOTA?
In my opinion, the solution for this can be:.
If NOTA gets majority then election commission must appoint special committee and conduct tests, for an example, they can conduct written exam, personal interview, group discussion, etc this will help to select the best deserving candidate for our country and as they have to appear for test, only the educated candidate will apply and our country will get the best.
I think this is the best way, as in our case if we have to get any govt job we have to go through all this test as they want best for the govt, then why not the candidate who will run the govt been treated the same way?
|Epshita said: (Jun 3, 2016)|
|In my opinion, NOTA option is not a perfect solution to prevent undesirable candidates from taking charge. But as in present, it is the only option available so we can present it before people in a better way. People should be made aware about its result (re-elections) which is a " BIG NO" so that people choose NOTA option when the candidates are really undeserving.
In such case re-elections are conducted, which will consume lesser resource than a rejected candidate will waste during its ruling span.
|Shreya Nair said: (Jun 2, 2016)|
|The NOTA option signifies that one does agree with the options given above, this is what takes place in a multiple choice questions paper! But is an MCQ paper similar to voting? NOTA is pointless. We choose the most appropriate Government Out of the options and NOTA stands for nothing productive. Will I as a voter go all the way to the booth just to choose nothing? Any ways this system of choosing Govt. Is pointless enough, we choose the most appropriate Govt. A govt whose speeches made more sense that the other, who we less intimidated of.|
|Vicky Jacker said: (Jun 2, 2016)|
I agree all of your points NOTA is also the best idea but we are citizens to choose our leader because we may know our candidate's good and bad news so before pressing the NOTA button we must think all the candidates and vote for the right person we are thinking.
Thanks for giving this opportunity.
|Dristi said: (Jun 1, 2016)|
|NOTA is a good option because no matter whom we vote there's no change in society. We should spread awareness among people about NOTA. I will wait in queue even I have to vote NOTA even if my 1 NOTA doesn't make a difference because at least I was given a chance to vote what I really want. Mainly because I don't have any politicians in my family so I no need to stick up for one.|
|Saajal said: (Jun 1, 2016)|
|Consider you are going to a restaurant or other shop, if you don't like any of the times being offered to you, you have the option to reject them all and convey your dissatisfaction, but what if when it comes to choosing the leaders of your locality, your city, your district, your state and your country. After all, they will be selected as the decision makers of the country. If none of them deserves to be nominated as a leader then it should be, as far as the cost of re-elections is concerned, it will be far lesser than the cost which will be incurred in the 5 years of the term due to their inefficiency and corruption.
In my view, NOTA should be there along with some strict guidelines to be adopted by parties in case the percentage of NOTA is higher.
|Karu27 said: (Jun 1, 2016)|
|Hello, according to me not as an option is not a very great idea, as no person would ever prefer to stand in long queues, just to vote NOTA, knowing well that his/her vote doesn't make a difference to the candidate he is rejecting. Would you my friend ever go to an expensive restaurant just to have a look at the menu and reject every item. No, you would not go. Same is the case, if a person is not so sure who to vote for, he would prefer to utilize his time somewhere else, then go through the tedious procedure of voting, when both means the same.|
|Balagangadhar said: (May 30, 2016)|
According to me, NOTA option button is the right choice, but the one who is choosing the option as NOTA might be the wrong choice I think. Because every citizen in society having a choice to choose the correct person for country development, if you choose NOTA means your vote is wasting that means loss of 1 vote.
So as a conclusion I can suggest giving your valid vote to Leader, who is compared to other leaders is the best. I can suggest to government also like along with NOTA option, they must give the option like choosing your best leader in that party.
|Ramanpreet Singh said: (May 29, 2016)|
According to me, NOTA button in voting polls has more disadvantages. As most of the people will choose this option and we will not get the best candidate and the election will take place again and again. This will waste the resources and time of both public as well as the election commission and as we all know that how much money is being spent by the political parties on the elections and if NOTA will get the green signal then we can imagine how much money will be wasted.
So I think this method have more drawbacks than its benefits and if this is adopted then EC must have to think about its causes.
|Ros said: (May 28, 2016)|
|I think NOTA is not a good option. Because friends we are thinking only on one side. We just think about educated people only but what about that community of people live in a village? I think this NOTA creates lots of confusion for them. And also if NOTA get more votes then re-election should be conducted. Which require lots of money that will definitely affect the peoples which are below poverty level.
|Yash said: (May 28, 2016)|
|At one point in time, I will NOTA will be really beneficial. But there are chances that NOTA% would be higher than any of the nominated candidates. Which indeed will again cause problems (who should take charge?). A RE-ELECTIONS? No, its again waste of resources. Sometimes it happens that leaders change their positions/wards. I feel there should be an option of "KEEP IT AS IT IS" i.e. same leader should take charge. Conducting re-elections might lead to more of corruptions.|
|Sunny said: (May 28, 2016)|
|Hi friends, all of here expressed their views regarding NOTA. In my view, NOTA is not a Great idea its good idea because why I am saying is here in our country each person has right individually voted to the person if he doesn't like candidates he simply presses NOTA but what happen finally some body electing as a representative of constitution now tell me where the NOTA votes are considered I think nowhere right just for percentage vote share to NOTA i.e. insense no action has taken regarding votes of NOTA if Election commissioner takes action regarding NOTA"why some or few people has voted it". Then people aware of it and can vote it then only the original intention regarding NOTA will come into existences.
May I concluded this NOTA is a good idea, not a great idea!
|Supriya said: (May 28, 2016)|
|I think NOTA is the best way to show the real place of corrupted politicians in government. If they are not able to get that position then we can choose NOTA.|
|Neha said: (May 27, 2016)|
|According to me, NOTA button will be helpful in a way though it is not a perfect way to choose a better leader. NOTA button undoubtedly provides an option to the voter to not choose any of the nominated candidates and also increases the percentage of votes. But increase in vote percentage merely is not enough. If more than 50% people choose NOTA, re-elections will be held and I don't think carrying out the process of nominations again will help because the political leaders will again nominate the candidates based on their requirement and not according to people's interest. Reelection results might not be fruitful. So there is a requirement of a much stronger solution to improve the political scenario.
|Avani said: (May 27, 2016)|
|According to me, NOTA choice is the best answer a voter can give to the highly corrupted and uneducated politicians and the best way to select the deserving person. This should be introduced in our voting system as soon as possible.
This option will give the voter the right to vote as well as reject the unwanted persons if they don't feel them be deserving after analysing their previous criminal records and education.
Youth will be encouraged to use their right for a fruitful purpose and this can ultimately lead to the betterment of the society.
|Raju said: (May 26, 2016)|
I think that the NOTA option is good for us because in many places of India where the candidates use power and money to get the vote. In this situation, the voters can easily use NOTA option for an undesirable candidate.
Should voters be given a NOTA (None Of The Above) choice?
Email : (optional)
» Your comments will be displayed only after manual approval.