Should voters be given a NOTA (None Of The Above) choice?

Keeping in mind the interest of public. Nota should be given as option to them So that they can show up their neutral interest. It can also seek the attention of competing parties what they can rectify in their style so that they can gain this NOTA vote shares. As NOTA shares have crucial role in election.

Seeing the massive percentage of vote shares for NOTA, I think people must be free to not choose anyone at all.

This will flash a message to the politicians that people aren't finding any of them eligible for the healthy democracy. In this way, NOTA seems to be safeguarding the right of freedom to not choose. Even by not choosing, people are choosing. So essence and soul of the electoral process is more secure in the due process.

In my opinion, NOTA option is not required.

Even though NOTA is chosen, the second majority party is declared as the winner.

Instead of that, there should be a rule that every citizen should know the laws and amendments of the nation in especially the candidate, and only educated candidates should be permitted for nomination.

In my opinion, the NOTA (None of the Above) option should not be included in elections because it diminishes competition among candidates.

For instance, if the difference in votes between the winner and the runner-up is very small, the votes cast for NOTA could have been redirected to another candidate. This would increase the chances of the most deserving or accurate candidate winning the election.

In my opinion, the option NOTA does not make that much sense.

Let's take an example if there are 4 candidates and let's consider (there is a person x) who thinks all the 4 are undeserving candidates so he pressed the NOTA option.

So by pressing NOTA, it does not mean that no one will. The one with the maximum votes among 4 of them will win and thus he is wasting the vote. So rather than that he should look out of the 4 who have some deserving qualities and vote for that respective person.

1. People will take it so casually, and select NOTA as a choice for some silly reasons like, their caste people haven't got a ticket.

2. There are some lazy people, who don't take the responsibility of selecting a good leader, Instead of analyzing party plans they simply select NOTA and say "I don't have political knowledge", But being in a democratic country everyone should know about the happening of politics because your vote is not only useful for you. It shows a big difference when counted collectively.

3. Instead of providing NOTA, the ECI should do good work while confirming nominations, they should check the history of the person.

Also, it will be the best practice if ECI changes the rule to "Only certified/educated candidates are allowed to nomination process". So the dissatisfaction rate people will decrease.

Thank you.

In my opinion, the option NOTA does not make that much sense.

Let's take an example if there are 4 candidates and let's consider (there is a person x) who thinks all the 4 are undeserving candidates so he pressed the NOTA option.

So by him pressing NOTA, it does not mean that no one will. The one with the maximum votes among 4 of them will win and thus he is wasting the vote. So rather than that he should look out of the 4 who have some deserving qualities and vote for that respective person.

Hello everyone, yes I support the point of view of having NOTA as an option for the public in selecting their suitable leader during the election because-.

1) It encourages people to fulfil their basic rights of at least going and voting even if they are not satisfied with participating candidates.

2) If NOTA percentage increases it gives the government an idea about people dissatisfied with standing candidates to rethink about changing them.

3) It gives the public a choice and does not force them to choose a suitable leader representing them and working for them.

Yes, NOTA should be necessary in democracy because it protects people's right to elect in even the most corrupt situations in case of both the members are bad and corrupt or they don't like the single nominee in their constituency they would still have NOTA option.

Hello mates,

Every coin has two sides. NOTA has both pros and cons. NOTA shows the dissatisfaction level of the people.

But, In my point of view, there should not be a NOTA option because the people who don't know NOTA, unknowingly press the NOTA. Because of these activities.

That the election committee should appoint a good elective nominee before the election itself.

I would prefer no to the NOTA option because there are so many options to choose. This is not an exam with options given both of the above and none of the above nor it has just two or three options. Well, the NOTA option may increase participation but after getting the outcome of the result the government may proceed to reconduct the election and it is a heavy process for the government itself. It's sort of a bypass for giving votes to none. Who will decide and on what basis election commission answer if most of the votes turn to NOTA?