Politics considered unendorsable by the median voter on in a "central" position in the hyperspace of all issues in play at an election.
> And why would forcing people to vote keep them from becoming overly influential?
Median voters are generally poorly motivated to turn out. Fringe voters are generally highly motivated. Consequently they become influential out of proportion to the actual preferences of the population taken as a whole.
When voting is mandatory, the better strategy is to aim your policies at the median voter (Hotelling's Law), which helps to create sustainable reforms because parties will converge on consensus policies.
When voting is voluntary, the better strategy is the motivate/demotivate approach. Motivate your followers with a shiny geegaw, demotivate the other guy's with dirt.
I'm generalising, of course. But the long-term principle holds fairly well.
Politics considered unendorsable by the median voter on in a "central" position in the hyperspace of all issues in play at an election.
> And why would forcing people to vote keep them from becoming overly influential?
Median voters are generally poorly motivated to turn out. Fringe voters are generally highly motivated. Consequently they become influential out of proportion to the actual preferences of the population taken as a whole.
When voting is mandatory, the better strategy is to aim your policies at the median voter (Hotelling's Law), which helps to create sustainable reforms because parties will converge on consensus policies.
When voting is voluntary, the better strategy is the motivate/demotivate approach. Motivate your followers with a shiny geegaw, demotivate the other guy's with dirt.
I'm generalising, of course. But the long-term principle holds fairly well.