In 1976 as a response to the Watergate scandal Nevada implemented a process allowing voters to cast a vote for "none of these candidates" in every statewide election for federal or state offices. The protest vote which is not binding has been the top vote getter in four primary elections. In instances where "none of these candidates" has won, the second place candidate still wins.
Some are of the opinion that a non binding protest vote is a waste of time, others believe that it is important to encourage disgruntled people to still participate in the voting process. This year state lawmakers in Connecticut, Iowa and Massachusetts, have considered providing a "none of these candidates" option to voters, but the bills have died in committee. In the past five years other states including Florida, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, Vermont and Washington have considered but rejected adopting similar measures.
Legislation to make "none of these candidates" a binding vote was introduced in Massachusetts, but has not passed. Various versions of "none of these candidates" are used in Australia, Columbia, Greece, Spain and the Ukraine.
What do you think about offering voters a "none of these candidates" option?