第 6 部分

由 Donald Tsang 2015-05-25 23:46:18
Uncooperative people may use this as a chance to filibuster again. At this moment, many people wish to vote, so this is feasible.

由 Carol Yuen 2014-10-28 16:30:51
如果選擇不投票的人, 就已經是一種表態。他們已默許自己的權力給其他人。

由 葉家翹 2014-09-17 16:12:26

由 Joe 2014-06-18 15:41:17

由 Frederick Liu 2014-05-28 09:59:29
depends. if the rights to nominate are equal, no. if not, minimum turnout rate must be higher than 50%

由 Brian 2014-05-11 23:07:44
This ensures that the chief executive who wins the elections actually win the favor and interest of the electorate and are not simply chief executive because only half the people voted and he won by a small margin. This ensures the legitimacy of the chief executive\'s victory via voting.

由 Jasmine Kan 2014-05-09 23:24:30
The election will be ineffective if less than 75% of the registered general electorate attends the event as the results may be inaccurate considering the amount of people that have participated in the election.

由 Owen Lau 2014-05-05 00:51:06
可參考近5 屆立會選舉的平均/ 最低投票率

由 李樂軒 2014-05-04 00:09:23

由 Ling C 2014-05-03 23:21:51

由 Tommy Shek 2014-05-03 23:17:21

由 Drew C. Yu 2014-05-03 23:09:02

由 kelly 2014-05-03 22:13:47

由 khc 2014-05-03 19:38:22

由 LOUIE HIM HOI 2014-05-02 23:52:11

由 Rishi Kukreja 2014-05-02 22:45:58
Public participation is vital for politics to gain legitimacy. I am strongly against compulsory voting, as I believe people should have the right to choose to go to the polls or not, and it further gives a good indication of how the public view politics and the system. A low turnout could be a symptom of people being dissatisfied with all candidates or the system in place, in which case radical changes would be needed. If voting were compulsory, it may create a fake impression of civic involvement, and blank votes would be the only avenue to express one\'s dissatisfaction. Ensuring a turnout of at least 50 per cent would indicate a relatively healthy level of civic involvement and trust in the process, while anything below that would indicate problems with the level of confidence in the system or the candidates on offer.

由 Ryan Chiu 2014-05-02 18:14:28
無民意基礎, 好似隻68狗咁, 點施政

由 CHAN Kam Fung 2014-05-01 12:54:05

由 Leung Kwan Yuk 2014-04-30 17:08:44
如果有人想杯擱選擇 只會讓對手當選 避免有類以拉布的問題 辦一場選舉已經花了很多錢

由 Brian 2014-04-30 11:56:52
低於此投票率,即有絕大部份香港公民選擇不信任這些候選人,應從新安排新一輪 選舉,包括重新提名。

由 Lorraine Cheung 2014-04-30 00:17:05
現出太多新香港人出現, 香港選舉已不公平, 政府明知有建制派和中聯辦等做手脚種票也不理, 所以要有公平的投票機制, 一人一票最重要

由 林健恆 2014-04-29 23:38:38

由 Cassandra Leigh Ward 2014-04-29 15:26:48
If you want Hong Kong to change and to truly reflect the will of the people then, at least 80% of the population should have to vote. Compulsory voting will reflect the will of the people and it will encourage high voter turnouts.

由 Cherlene Emma Chang 2014-04-28 07:08:26
If the voters purposely choose not to exercise their right of democracy, it is their loss. Setting another election is not only a waste of resources, but also, it allows the cycle of continuous voting with no results, if some decide to skip the voting. In addition, voters will experience one term of the elected candidate and if they like or dislike his ruling, they will hopefully vote next term, to voice their opinions.

由 Erwin Lee 2014-04-28 02:44:08
The main goal is that the public of Hong Kong elects an individual that can clearly do what the majority of Hong Kong desires. If half of Hong Kong does not even bother to express their opinion by casting their vote, then a proper consensus has not been taken. That is why the minimum is at 50%, so that the the decision for who becomes the Chief Executive is taken seriously and that a good consensus is actually being acquired.

由 Jessica 2014-04-27 23:16:08
If this were to happen in Hong Kong, it may take forever for elections to finish.

由 David 2014-04-27 18:34:54
If the candidate does not even hold the agreement of 30% of the votes, I believe is it is not a clear representation of the will of the people, and therefore a new election should be held.

由 陳沛曦 2014-04-17 00:29:41

由 Glen Ng 2014-04-07 12:47:19
I can accept lower percentage if the r number of registered voters is higher. 50% of all eligible citizens should be enough.

由 張家偉 2014-03-31 19:46:38

由 黃君亮 2013-12-11 01:02:59
2012立法會選舉投票率(53%),2008立法會選舉投票率(45%),2004立法會選舉投票率(55%) 最低投票率可參考約為合資格選民人數40%

由 Daniel John Gittings 2013-12-09 17:16:44
This would help to prevent a \"sham\" election with a restricted range of candidates, since the turnout might not then reach this threshold.

由 Man Chun Wai 2013-12-09 08:27:38
應立法為強制投票 (5%為選民寧受罰也不投票作為的技術性冗餘)

由 David TIU 2013-12-05 16:29:54

由 譚江傑 2013-12-04 22:16:42

由 Kyle Chan 2013-12-04 15:03:19

由 Tszhm 2013-12-04 00:49:24
Assuming population = 7M, sampling size should be approx 34% = 2.4M to get to an margin of error = approx 5%.

由 Leonhard Weese 2013-12-03 23:42:28
There must be a way to boycott an election. One way of doing that is a minimum voter turnout. Another option is a \'against all\' option on the ballot. I would favor the \'against all\' option, as apathy should not be mixed with disapproval.

由 陳禧暘 2013-12-03 21:05:46
一個沒有選民支持的選舉, 必然沒有其認受性

由 QIN Hongdong 2013-12-03 17:59:35

由 Ying 2013-12-03 17:05:40
I believe that there should be a limit of 51% or more. However, this is actually quite a high turnout so while this is ideologically the best we can do-- i.e. ensuring over half of the citizens participate in voting, it might not be practicable (in that it may lead to many failed elections). Still, if we force voting to be at least 51%, it may be possible that the government wil make special compensations, e.g. a half day holiday to ensure voting. This may help boost the voting percentage.

由 Ivan 2013-12-03 13:06:34
Voting is a means to express one\'s political opinion. Asking citizens who do not have strong political preference to vote violates the purpose of voting and may damage the validity of the results.

由 Jennifer Eagleton 2013-11-25 10:57:12
I’m undecided at this stage about minimum percentage. Maybe it is easier if a candidate achieves the greatest number of votes out of all those standing for the position, so this number (percentage) would fluctuate from election to election. If just two people are standing it would perhaps be easier to use this method. Maybe for more than two candidates a minimum percentage should apply as this “dilutes” the ballot somewhat, maybe over 40% - and if under, perhaps a run-off, whereby candidates under a certain percentage drop out and the higher achievers then take part in a runoff. I suppose there would be undecided voters who would spoil their ballot or leave it intentionally blank; I’m not sure if this would be a high percentage though.

由 Guest 0000-00-00 00:00:00