Is there a good reason for NOT voting? 

Conclusion: Politics is a joke.

In a "put your mouth where your money is" sort of way, he certainly is.

He was one of the people most adamant about leaving. Now, he has the "pleasure" of actually organizing Britain's departure from the EU, with whatever consequences that may yield for the country, or his political career.

They're of the same roost, but from the two furthest ends: one built its house on an enormous mound of loose stones (and the occasional skull), the other tries to balance an increasingly burgeoning building atop a tiny, aging foundation stone.

Eh. Deal or no deal, there will be an economic setback. No deal would probably hit harder, but the "shock therapy" may force Britain to become more economically self reliant. Not expecting a full revival of the heavy industrial sector, of course, but being forced to think on your feet can be a great motivator. And even with a deal, it may serve the country well to strengthen economic ties with the nations of the Commonwealth. America's bit of a wild card here, and I doubt this'll change after the Trump administration. Thing is, if the setback is great enough, it may just become the "second Poll Tax", which could destroy the career of any politician associated with it. And that's without mentioning the ammunition this would give to Scotland's ambitions of independence.

Controversy

Historically Speaking Granted, but what would happen if you had a monarch who didn’t give a shit?

@@aperson22222 civil uprising

Most people would not give 2 fucks if she was allowed to vote and starting voting. Long as she kept who she voted for secret.

aperson22222 I’m not sure if this is strictly true, but I think parliament can vote on dissolving the monarchy. So if she doesn’t do what they want, they can get rid of her. It’s why she always signs off on the PM, even though she can choose who she wants.

Because he was standing in a heavily-conservative borough and, despite his best efforts, split the Pirate Vote as the Pirates party were not originally going to stand a candidate there, but did anyway.

I don't think he'd want to run for it anyway. He seems like a man who has at least some appreciation of the truth.

@@HolyKhaaaaan The candidate "Mad Cap'n Tom" actually is Tom Scott.

Because he already controls the world

Facts

That's why it's important to know how to spoil your ballot to properly invalidate it. The safest way is to leave it blank.

Pyra Darkstorm vote for everyone

Yes it was "counted" as a spoiled ballot. It wasn't 'valid' as a vote for the Greens (as Jay says around 4:20).

@@JamesKaplonek the ballot box restrictions are, on the surface, that strict. However, they are that strict to ensure people show a clear preference. by saying the greens were 'not shit' and everyone else was 'shit', the ballot was technically valid as a clear preference had been shown. the ballot counted as a Green vote

@@starguy321 I don't live in the UK but I really hope that's not the case. You should never be able to identify which vote is from whom. Otherwise, I could bribe someone and tell them to vote for a certain party and tell them to mark their vote in a certain way (such as by writing "shit" at every other party's names), and then I'd know for sure if the person I bribed did what they're supposed to.

And for Deez Nuts.

Harambe > Trump

Harambe > Trump > Clinton

Lesser of two evils mentality is the reason why people don't vote, plus the fact no matter who you vote for means you're hated by half the country by default and seen as a "dependable ally" by the other half even if you despise them and only voted because of the first reason why people don't vote. What's worse? Getting shouted at and called a racist by Clinton acolytes or blabbered on about le deep state by Trump acolytes? Getting blabbered on about impeachment terms by Clinton voters or getting called a cuck by Trump voters? How about a bullet to the head?

@@bobbob5541 Harambe>Clinton=Trump Or, Harambe>Trump=Clinton

There is an other reason to vote for small parties. In countries like Germany the parties receive money from the state to run their capaigns before elections. The amount of money they get, depends on the amount of votes they got at the last election. So more votes mean more money which means more billboards, flyers, pens, better websites, more staff... Which means more effective campaigns and to an extend more votes in the next election.

@@timhuester7721 Here in the UK, you have to pay a deposit in order to be added to the ballot papers - and then if you get at least a certain percentage of the votes, you get your deposit back

Another reason: They might not win, but if the winner doesn't have majority, he has to ally with a small party.

LOL, And what happens when your ideology is so rare that it doesn't even have representatives?

This is smart but also keep in mind this should be done only when you're confident the large party you have the most support for is going to win, else it'll just give the guys you don't like a better chance.

Too sensible!

The US wouldn't have a president if that happened

@@calamaribowl8683 Good riddance. The past presidents have been sucking anyway. May as well try something different.

@@capturedflame Lol. Totally agree. Your policy's got my vote, partner.

My dad has helped to count ballots in various local elections, and apparently there are always several people who just write something along the lines of "they're all shit" on the ballot and put it in the box

Had to check the date on the video when I saw that.

I dont get it

I really hate Boris- He's litterally the worst.

@@CyborgCollective So did I! 😂

@@kokomelon6707 The “ME!” poster was a foreshadowing per-se of Boris Johnson winning Prime Minister in 2019

The Major Thank you for this comment

This year was for Lord Buckethead.

This is the best comment. Everybody else can go home

someone call tom scott

hear hear

Noel's House Party...now there's a relic of a bygone era!

This might be as in a following video Jay used the spotty party as an example?

Hätte nicht erwartet nen Saarländer hier zu sehen. Das mit den Grünen war scheiße…ich bin nur froh dass die FDP auch nicht reingekommen ist. Grüße aus Saarbrücken

@@lappipihentai5000 Ich bin aus RLP, aber da hat man das auch mitbekommen. Bei den kleineren Bundesländern ist die 5% Hürde eh schwierig

An interesting fact to add: There are a few regional parties of protected ethnic minorities that are exempt from the 5 % hurdle in state and federal elections. For example, in Schleswig-Holstein, the SSW (Südschleswigscher Wählerverbund) of the Danish minority there usually gets elected into the state parliament.

So if I was eligible to vote in Saarland, they would still need 22 more votes and nothing would change. Unless i could convince 22 people prior to voting to vote (even though I didn’t realise at that time 23 votes were needed). The “what if everybody thought that way” is a illogical argument. As whether or not I vote has no impact on whether or not other people vote. So whether or not everybody did or didn’t think the same way as me, it would make no difference/have no impact on whether my vote made a difference. Ironically, potentially persuading people on here (although I can’t imagine I’ll be persuading anyone) would arguably have a greater impact that voting itself (although definately not great enough o realistically impact any vote - so back to my initial argument).

Doesn’t this mean that they hate the best one?

@@The-Mov no, multiple negatives is emphasis in english.

Mov In this carefully crafted example it’s not quite a quad negative because the negatives aren’t in direct relation. It’s saying the least-bad is still not a palatable option

Warren Cash It used to be, and still is in some dialects like African American Vernacular English, but not in general English. In AAVE “I don’t have no money” means that you really don’t have any money, but most people read that as “I have some money”. I sometimes use double negatives for emphasis, it certainly can be used, but I have to make it clear it’s for emphasis

Er, actually she can, but she has said she won't. She has the royal prerogative. It is convention she does not.

@@mandowarrior123 I didn't know about that thanks ! She must say that but the law can't physically stop her to voting ?

@@sorban5352 Late reply, but even if there was a law to stop the queen voting (there isn't), she could vote anyway since she is above the law. She chooses not to as she's supposed to be above politics.

@@Earthcomputer ok thanks

I cant wait for the day that there is one mysterious write in vote that just says, "the queen" and a side not saying "yall keep fucking this shit up"

It's even greater after watching that Park Bench episode

I was too young to vote in the Brexit referendum and its infuriating that my generation are the ones who will be subjected to the poverty and destruction that Brexit will cause. We need to end democracy once and for all and prevent backwards decisions being made. The vast majority of the population can't even be trusted to look after their own health so why do we let them vote

@@josephdugdale4150 I'll agree with the first bit. I was something like 14 when the results of the first referendum were called. By the time Brexit is now 'supposed' to happen I'll be a voting adult with a few years' worth of frustration to figure out. I remember being more educated on Brexit's potential impacts from a few school sessions than half of the voters I spoke to, and it was disheartening to say the least. Still, ending democracy seems like a not very good idea. It may be bad, but it's worked better overall than the other bad options.

​@@josephdugdale4150 Many people who were old enough to vote and who will be affected didn't bother. Had 18-34 year olds turned out in the same numbers as the 55+, and had voted to stay in a similar proportion to those who did vote, the result would have gone to remain. With regards to getting rid of democracy - that's a strange position to take - you seem perfectly happy to accept the result of the democratic referendum held in 1975 that lead to the UKs entry into the EEC (now the EU), but decry the same democratic process because the result has gone a different way this time round and doesn't fit with your opinion. If you get rid of democracy, what do you replace it with? Who makes the decisions and what happens if you don't like the decision? You seem to be assuming that if we didn't have democracy, we'd remain in the EU, but that's a pretty big assumption.

@@gaildahlas eventually, when you are older, you will understand why your school did you a big disservice. By showing you one side of the argument, you believe you are Educated, when you are in fact the opposite. A little knowledge is more harmful than no knowledge at all. It is a bit like climate warriors, absolutely no real understanding of what climate even is.

Get ready for brexit. up the boris 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 🇬🇧

he ran? for real for real?

Go find his video's on "The Ballad of Mad Cap'n Tom" on the Tom and Matt channel. He legit ran

@@HN-kr1nf 4:34 Mad Cap'n Tom

I wanna live in the alternate universe where he won the vote

@@salamanda550 link?

Spoilt ballots in America aren't really useful in any way

Ditto, on some counts it was great fun seeing spoilt votes. I still do vote, but in a way it has to go to the panel to figure out my intentions. My last one I wrote tw@t next to all bar one, and ok next to the one I wanted to vote for. I did get some looks whilst voting as I was in the booth a while, and giggling.

That's surprising. Because in theory, if you're allowed to put something other than an X, that could theoretically be used as a way to check how someone voted.

@@EightThreeEight Any mark on a paper which could identify a voter would render a paper void

Yep, I've been an election agent and a tick or a number 1 or a smiley face would count. In theory something strange could be a mark by which the voter could be identified but in practice it's unlikely. My personal favourite was an election in Scotland in 1994. At the bottom of the paper someone very neatly drew another box, wrote Nelson Mandela and voted for him. I think that Mr Mandela had more important things to do than be the councillor for Airthrey in Central Region but I like to think he would have been appreciative of the gesture.

Spencer O'Dowd Since America is not a single country, you can't live in multiple countries at the same time

In the English speaking world, the word "America" in isolation almost always refers to the United States of America. What you're referring to is what we in English call "the Americas."

America is, Americas isn't.

Spencer O'Dowd you mean the two continents

@Kimberly Sharpe You are mistaken, As long as you have been registered to vote within the last 15 years or left the UK before reaching voting age then you can still vote.

i was thinking that too lmao

Yeah I went to the comments to see if someone else caught that 😂

What song is playing in the backround of that bit

@@arch_dornan6066 I don't know

@@quill5579 nvm it's passing out pieces by mac demarco

That's Tom Scott actually.

@@gfrewqpoiu I know, it's only funny if you know "The ballad of mad cap'n tom - Part 2"

You misremember the Bush administration. Regardless of the closeness of the Presidential election, the Republican Party had kept slim but stable majorities in the Senate and House from the Clinton years and in the post-9/11 years, which was only changed in 2006. Bush only had to work with a fully Democratic Congress for 2 years in his last term, and a split Congress for 2 years in his first. There's not much incentive to compromise when you have pretty much all you need and a mandate to use it. There are compromises from that era, but none that I would brag about. The PATRIOT Act comes to mind as the worst example.

America's electoral college makes their voting systems even worse.

Yep

OfficialNerdCubed I trust you.

OfficialNerdCubed That's what she said

My teacher made us watch this a week ago then nerd cube sends me here what are the chances

OfficialNerdCubed Aye,Dan,You sent me here...Hmm...

*TRIGGERED*

@J. M. yeah I guess

@J. M. people's votes don't matter, because the delegates vote however they want.

but electoral college is actually a good system.

@J. M. it is.

That’s a pretty good concept you’ve got there in Ontario. I am Australian, where voting is compulsory. Now, compulsory voting is a EXCELLENT system for many reasons, but one common criticism is: “What if I don’t want to vote for any of the bastards?” The usual solution I suggest is to write exactly that on the ballot. But it’s quite true that the recording of this intention is lost amongst all the other informal votes.

You could just put a giant X over the whole ballot, that is on purpose and still secret. But at least you can say official "I'm not satisfied with any of those".

@@mammutMK2 The problem is when your ballot is counted it doesn't go in a separate category that says something like "people who took the time to not be bothered". Instead you end up in the same category as those who actually can't follow instructions. We really need that option methink. Or at least if the ballot is spoiled in a specific way (big cross across everything, a sentence or two about how everybody suck etc) it should be counted in its own category.

@@lechuck3337 The confidentiality of your vote is still secure in this case, because you didn't cast it. However, your non-vote isn't a secret.

In federal elections, and in BC, if you "spoil" your ballot and it goes in the box, it is considered "rejected" and gets counted separately from candidates' votes, or spoiled ballots (which are errors, etc.).

Carl Siemens Yargh Brian the duck be off in the Newlands me harty

@HighOnNarcotics Hes dead. Deadmen tell no tales and also tell nothing on how to run the country so probably not the best choice

same here, just saw the enrty and started laughting. Cool explanations on this channel Jay At least Tom got 84 poeple :-)

YES!

Glad I'm not the only one who knows about it.

MEME yay

OMG same

They just elected a leader called... wait for it... Dick Braine. No really!

you’re*

You laugh but they died because they achieved their sole policy. Brexit. Yes we have not left but did vote to leave, so now UKIP has no reason to exist, but their popularity led Cameron to promise a referendum in 2015 election. The rest is history.

Literally the most successful party this century, got enough support to achieve their one and only goal without ever having to form a parliament, but sure thing.

But then again, Brexit Party.

So unconstitutional = not illegal? 🤔

@@kubli365 Yes, believe it or not. The UK Constitution is mostly uncodified and largely based on constitutional conventions, i.e. unwritten and generally accepted political agreements/rules/traditions which are not enforceable by the courts. So an action that goes against a convention could be deemed unconstitutional, but not necessarily illegal. The Queen and other senior royals can legally vote, but they choose not to do so because of an unwritten convention - if they voted, it would be unconstitutional, but not illegal.

@@matthewmccallion3311 Sounds like a load a rubbish to me

@@ReddoFreddo I know it sounds like that, but that's how it actually is. UK constitutional law is really that absurd and confusing

@@matthewmccallion3311 Well it wouldn't be the first absurd and confusing thing about the UK government.

@Godzilla Hårddisksson No. No, he doesn't.

@Godzilla Hårddisksson Firstly, scarily accurate =/= scary. If, say, The Simpsons in 1995 had predicted the exact brackets of the Premier League in 2015, that would not have been scary, but would have been scarily accurate. And secondly, assuming the OP meant both scary and scarily accurate, I would definitely consider one man trying to dismiss people he is supposed to be accountable to, among whom he is supposed be an equal, so that he can push a country of over 60 million people (who were repeatedly lied to during the making of said) towards a massively consequential decision, that wasn't legally binding in the first place, with no plan whatsoever of what will happen afterwards, could be considered scary to some.

That's... all kinds of fucked up. I don't know how it is in the UK, but here in Germany, the ballot explicitly cautions the voter by saying "You should put _exactly one_ cross here. No, a check mark or anything similar doesn't count." They make it pretty obvious how to spoil your ballot and then going back on it and saying "No, this one still counts." is frankly baffling. Somehow, I don't think that returning officer was all that unbiased.

+Nixitur I understand that the only thing that the returning officer needs to do is decide if voter intention is conveyed. The idea is that accidentally spoils they're ballot, but the intention of the voter ID clear, then the returning officer can count it. The thing is if no clear voter intention can be discerned, like crossing every box, or not even filling in any boxes, then the vote is counted as a spoilt vote. German elections are different due to the mixed member representation and the two votes that are on the ballot paper.

+vaska00762 There is also a the argument of voter annonymity. Anything that could identify your vote invalidates the ballot.

+vaska00762 There is also a the argument of voter annonymity. Anything that could identify your vote invalidates the ballot.

Quintinohthree Not actually. OK, a name, or something that explicitly identifies a voter, yes, that's a spoilt vote, but if it is not an identifier, say a tick instead of a cross, that's can't be traceable. Of course in Northern Ireland, ballots are traceable back to the individual that cast the vote. The purpose is in case of an electoral fraud investigation, which can be carried out very easily in Northern Ireland. I understand, though that the identifying documents are destroyed after a set period of time afterwards, should no electoral fraud case be brought up.

**cries**

And Boris is already a thing of the past (and hopefully he stays there).

Yeah i don’t see why we should vote all this does is say we support the legitimacy of our government I fucking don’t I want it to burn

Yeah, no. Still not convinced.. I hope a day comes when an election can only be considered illegitimate (as if our current government isn't illegitimate anyway) because the voter turn out is so low.

@@jmurray1110 based.

A few people have asked this. In 2015, while he was still mayor of London, Boris decided to return to Westminster politics. He did so by running in the safe Tory seat of Uxbridge and South Ruislip. This is what was in the news at the time and this is what I was referring to. I couldn’t have dreamt that 4 years later he’d end up being prime minister.

@@JayForeman hehehe

⁠@@JayForemanAnd 3 years after that he resigned due to partying when a global pandemic was wiping out millions. How times change ay?

It wasn’t a joke about Boris becoming PM. It was a reference to his safe seat of Uxbridge and South Ruislip, where he arrogantly stepped in to return to Westminster politics and win comfortably, despite still being mayor of London.

@@JayForeman oh thanks ! I never knew that !

Now THAT'S a joke, for certain!!

@@JayForeman why was it arrogant for him to return to parliament?

@@SethTheOrigin because he was mayor of london. it's pretty arrogant to give yourself an important job that you won't be able to perform properly while you've already got a very important job

Wow good pick up, missed that myself.

Datenegassie Yargh Mad capn Tom be getting my vote

Because you'll basically be a bigger joke than Mad Cap'n Tom.

participating in elections isn't always as easy as it looks, you have to find a party to run for, or start one yourself, or maybe you can, but only if you received enough signatures, or you have to pay a deposit/fee... And if you want to recoup at least some of those costs, you better campaign, which is yet another way to waste money and time.

Cool, you going to cover the costs?

Well..... It's not that simple

Nope.

People don't vote because not everyone bothers to learn about politics, and rather than voting for "whoever my friends do" or "the one on the news last week", they accept that their opinions are biased and probably wrong, and leave the decision to people who actually know what the fuck is going on. It's like asking a 10 year old to cook you a gourmet meal and getting upset when they don't know how.

Exactly. They'll have even less of a chance if you don't vote!

Well, to be brutally honest, you should still vote for that candidate even if they can't win. It gives them the exposure the candidate NEEDS in order to achieve anything. For instance, with 3rd party candidates voting for one of them can most certainly help them get all of the attention they need, so people learn more about candidates like them and increase their chances of winning another time around.

that's my problem with it i haven't a clue who and what to vote for and know if i do vote that it's not based on a like on the person but more just for the sake of voting to me anyway is wrong

Rawiri Berryman-Kamp: That’s a semi-acceptable point, and I can see where people like that are coming from (and have been there). With that said, one of the counterarguments I can see raised to that is “you should educate yourself on politics, as you have no excuse not to”. Thoughts?

it wasn't a reference.

Alwin Priven fuck off nigga

+Arsène Wenger No u.

that's not amercia either tho so

@@psychodelic1457 not everything have to do with America. And im glad

A common misconception. You can change fuck all by voting. The real advantage of a democracy is that our politicians can't steal as much as dictators and their chums. Which is definitely worth something, don't get me wrong, I like that about democracies.

@@Volkbrecht but that's the thing, i live under a dictatorship that's why in my case i can't change anything by voting, because the dictator will still change the numbers as he pleases don't assume everyone has the privilege of living in a democratic country, please

@@yanstein8464 you wouldnt be able to change anything by voting either

69th like

In America all 50 states have different criteria for which candidates and parties are on their ballot and only some states have a write in option. It's a pretty good time. I find myself completely unrepresented by all of our parties, and that's including all the minor meme parties along with the 2 juggernauts. Voting is definitely a game of "least worst".

THANK YOu I was looking for this song!

Alex02 I’m super happy that I was able to help :)

It's not a hackintosh. It's a blank screen that we superimposed the graphics onto afterwards.

Aye right, lol, you superimpose the desktop from an Apple machine onto the monitor of your Windows machine? Great videos BTW, you deserve a lot more views, really well made, a bit of fringing here and there when you do the green screen, but that's nothing, really like your content.

They "superimpose" Apple onto a Windows machine *taps side of nose* *winks* LOL

I might be wrong, but I believe Apple has not directly banned Hackintosh machines. It's completely legal.

Reasonably Reasonable Videos It violates the end user license for OS X. They have taken plenty of ppl to court over.

I didn't know _that_ razor-thin margin got the Thuringian FDP into the _Bundestag._ Thanks for the information, and the very good point! After all, if that one person stayed home, the election there would have gone differently!

It’s not a Hackintosh. It was my parents’ PC. The monitor was switched off and I added all the graphics from my own Mac in post.