Not Voting and Null Voting

There's been a lot of chatter about null votes and vote abstention in recent days, including a pair of recent columns from José Antonio Crespo and a note in Excélsior today. Crespo, who details the efforts of a handful of null-vote enthusiasts in the first of the linked columns, implies that the there is a certain nobility in the null vote, that it is a principled stand against an array of unappealing electoral options. 

I don't really see what purpose a null vote as opposed to the principled abstention serves. A vote that inevitably disappears into irrelevancy isn't much different from a vote that never was. Moreover, why don't those same people who are organizing null vote drives redirect their organizational skills toward together joining or forming a political party? In the short run, such a project can't achieve less than not voting at all, and in the long run, of course, grass-roots groups can grow into mainstream, broad-based coalitions (for better or worse) with the power to significantly impact the decisions of parties and alter the outcome of elections. Which would seem like a pretty good way to broaden Mexico's electoral options. 

El Universal, which incidentally has a useful site up and running dedicated to election coverage, polled Mexicans about their views toward null votes and not voting. Asked whether not voting or turning in a null vote was good or bad, 76 percent responded that it was bad, against only 10 percent that said it was good. Another question asked whether Mexicans, if none of the available candidates seemed worthy of a vote, would react with a null vote or by not voting? Almost 40 percent found neither of the two options convincing.