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

Hello,

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.

Thank you.

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.

Hi Friends,

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.

Hello friends.

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?

WHY?

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.

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.

Hi friends,

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.

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.

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.

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.