Political Options and Voting Options

Political Options and Voting Options

 

Presently there is generally political anarchy in this country.

There is no streamlining of options.

Any fool from any political party can pretend to be a candidate and may start campaign soliciting (a formal bribe).

In other words asking for bribes.

Anybody who contributes to these guys is a fool.

I do not intend to educate fools.

Here is a point the Election Commissioner and his team should solve for the average voter to make proper voting options.

 

I request all to come for voting.

 

Abstaining from voting at this juncture is almost a criminal offense, if not, individual responsibility being wasted when offered free.

 

One cannot claim foul play, if one has not used his/her option judiciously.

 

My consideration here is how the option is counted after polling is declared closed.

 

Point number one is all the valid votes should be given equal validity and weight.

 

Selecting only the first three candidates polling top is rejecting a vast majority who opposed the top three.

 

Let me dissect it which no candidate seems to be willing to explain to the voter.

 

My assumption is nobody will get the 50% clearance.

 

In that scenario, if one takes the top three voting as 40%, 35% and 10% and using the second option of 10% to decide the winner is a total aberration and third candidate is voted out by default.

 

Of course second option of the 15% left out (say 8% and 5% and 2% ext;) is not taken into consideration.

 

My suggestion is the second option of the top two should be counted and should be added to the third as an option, instead of voting out the third by arbitrary default option.

It is very unlikely that the top two will get 50% even if the third candidates option is equally shared (becomes 45% and 40%).

If the second option of the first and second is equally shared with the third, the third candidate might even get more than 45% (or even fifty but very unlikely) which is more than the first past the post counting.

 

This is a mockery of political justice.

 

When this happens one or a few fools will go to courts for redress.

 

My bone of contention is that court should be free of arbitrary political justice.

 

There is a window of opportunity as in Zimbabwe for a military dictator to step in.

 

So my suggestion is for the election commissioner to take legal advice and declare the election null and void and have a reelection for the first three (only those three are eligible) candidates.

 

There should be no second option and whoever who tops irrespective of the 50% margin should be declared winner.

 

The third option has theoretically 25% at his/her stake or disposal and the top two also could be vying for a portion of that 25%.

Finally first past the vote wins and second option is discounted by default.

Why our parliament can sit down and have a contingency plan to avoid military insinuation (there were attempts in the past from Felix Dias Bandaranayike to current day) is open to question and avoiding political anarchy (not theoretical but given the ground situation it is really possible) is of paramount importance?