When we vote, we can make government better or worse.

In turn, our votes

can make people’s lives better or worse. If we make bad choices at the polls,
we get racist, sexist, and homophobic laws. Economic opportunities vanish or
fail to materialize. We fight unjust and unnecessary wars. We spend trillions on
ill-conceived stimulus plans and entitlement programs that do little to
stimulate economies or alleviate poverty. We fail to spend money on programs
that would work better. We get overregulation in some places,
underregulation in others, and lots of regulation whose sole effect is to secure
unfair economic advantages for special interests. We inflict and perpetuate
injustice. We leave the poor behind. We wage drug wars that ghettoize inner
cities. We throw too many people in jail. We base our immigration and trade
policies on xenophobia and defunct economic theories. Voting is morally
significant. Voting changes the quality, scope, and kind of government. The
way we vote can help or harm people. Electoral outcomes can be harmful or
beneficial, just or unjust. They can exploit the minority for the benefit of the
majority. They can do widespread harm with little benefit for anyone. So, in
this presentation, we argue that we have moral obligations concerning how we
should vote. Not just any vote is morally acceptable.

Obviously, the good and bad that governments do are not entirely attributable
to how we vote. But our vote is one of the deciding factor on how our govt.
would be for next 5 yrs.
The Folk Theory of Voting Ethics : 1. Each citizen has a civic duty to vote. In
extenuating circumstances, one can be excused from voting, but otherwise,
one should vote. 4 2. While it is true that there can be better or worse
candidates, in general any good faith vote is morally acceptable. At the very
least, it is better to vote than to abstain. 3. It is inherently wrong to buy or sell
one’s vote.
whisper campaign
The act of spreading negative rumors about a political candidate, in order to
discredit him or her in the eyes of voters. This can also be called a whispering
campaign.
It’s usually hard to trace whisper campaigns back to their source. That’s the
point, of course: whisper campaigns are meant to spread innuendos
anonymously and spoiling the reputation of the candidate so that he didn’t get
votes

Push polling- its an unfair and unethical political device used to communicate
negative messages. Under the guise of conducting a legitimate poll,
defamatory or otherwise negative and usually false information is conveyed.

Unfair Competition 

Practices that hamper the opponent’s ability to fairly compete are unethical.
You will sometimes see wealthy candidates hiring as many political consultants
as are available, not for their services, but to keep them from working for the
opponent. If a candidate condones the removal of posters, or any behavior
that stifles the opponent’s message, he or she is engaging in unethical
campaigning

Interference with the Electoral Process

Any campaign practice that provides an obstacle to a citizen’s ability to vote

interferes with our democratic notions of fair and free elections. Destruction of
mail-in ballots, deliberately staged traffic jams on Election Day, and voter
intimidation at the polls are all examples of unethical – and in many instances
illegal -- tactics designed to discourage voting.

Buying votes- Vote buying is a widespread phenomenon. It is usually viewed as

a purely economic exchange in which the voter sells his or her vote to the
highest bidder. In offering money, goods, or services there are three ways in
which givers might hope to get recipients to vote, or not to vote, for a
particular candidate. First, givers might hope to produce instrumental
compliance. If successful, recipients change their electoral behaviour in
exchange for tangible rewards. Second, givers may hope to generate
normative compliance. If successful, recipients change their electoral
behaviour because the offer convinces them of the goodness or worthiness of
the candidate. Third, givers may hope to generate coercive compliance by
bullying recipients into changing their electoral behaviour. If successful,
recipients fear retribution if they decline the offer.
 Intimidation of voters, or voter intimidation, refers to the act of intimidating,
threatening, or coercing another person to interfere with their right to vote for
the candidate of their choice and deliberately gaining their votes through
through intimidation.

Offering freebies- Political parties promise to offer free electricity/water

supply, monthly allowance to unemployed, daily wage workers and women
as well as gadgets like laptops, smartphones etc. in order to secure the vote
of the people.
Not following model code of conduct- as we all know The MCC is a set of
guidelines issued by the Election Commission (EC) to regulate
political parties and candidates prior to elections. But some dirty
tricks are played by candidates and they don’t follow these
guidelines properly and uses unfair means in the election process.