> A lot of things about the US election process suck. I think a great way to eliminate almost all possibility of cheating is to add a "None of the above" option for every contest. If "None of the above" wins the election, then we hold a new one, and none of the candidates from the first can be in it.

It works for little communities. On nationwide contests, such process may become unmanageable and really costy. At any rate, it won't eliminate cheating or make it more difficult.

> A few years ago here, there was a ballot measure that would have changed the method of counting votes so that all non-votes would count as No votes.

Non-votes, meaning cards left blank, should be considered as votes to the winner, because they express unconditioned acceptance of either result. Void (irregular) cards must be counted as "void", because they don't express acceptance of either result (or a dissenting opinion). Void votes aren't of anyone of the parties.

> And this last is just food for thought: in some places, like Brazil, voting is mandatory.

A simple rule is the Italian way to force people to vote: the third time you don't go to vote (this applies only to political elections, not to administrative contests like the election of the Regional Council or such), you loose all of your political rights.
Of course, if you don't like the candidates, you can simply void your vote.

AP.