• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should willfully ignorant people be allowed to vote

Joined
Mar 8, 2013
Messages
679
Reaction score
145
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Should willfully ignorant people be allowed to vote? Or should voter be required to document that they have done a reasonable effort at researching candidates and issues to obtain a voter I.D.? Should equal use of both Democrat and Republican news sources be part of the definition of reasonable effort? Should people who are unemployed have to spend more time on research than the employed, to qualify as a reasonable effort? with each person's search documentation attached to their identity and subject to a challenge, and the way they voted remaining anonymous? Should we make it easier to obtain voter I.D. than it presently is, by eliminating proof of current residence as a requirement, which poses an unnecessary hardship on the poor and minorities?
 
Most voters are ignorant of who they are voting for, especially as they move down the ticket. Like who really knows the judge or state senator for whom they are casting a ballot.
 
1. Should willfully ignorant people be allowed to vote?
2. Or should voter be required to document that they have done a reasonable effort at researching candidates and issues to obtain a voter I.D.?
3. Should equal use of both Democrat and Republican news sources be part of the definition of reasonable effort?

1. In the words of John Kerry, "People have the right to be stupid."
2. reasonable effort? subjected to too much opinion. Will lead to more corruption. You didn't research this about my candidate. What do you mean you support what that candidate did? Don't you know what that means? You're banned!
3. Democrats tend to believe that there is no media bias. They do not think anything from the right is a legitimate source. Again too much opinion here. Afterall, you can watch Fox News and agree with everything Juan Williams, and Alan Colmes says and say you researched using a "right wing source."

Even a list suggesting what each candidate stands for, could be biased
 
Last edited:
Should willfully ignorant people be allowed to vote? Or should voter be required to document that they have done a reasonable effort at researching candidates and issues to obtain a voter I.D.? Should equal use of both Democrat and Republican news sources be part of the definition of reasonable effort? Should people who are unemployed have to spend more time on research than the employed, to qualify as a reasonable effort? with each person's search documentation attached to their identity and subject to a challenge, and the way they voted remaining anonymous? Should we make it easier to obtain voter I.D. than it presently is, by eliminating proof of current residence as a requirement, which poses an unnecessary hardship on the poor and minorities?

I strongly support weighting votes based on the knowledge of the voter. IMO, it's embarrassing that we use a system where the vote of a political genius counts the same as someone who votes based solely on the skin colors of the candidates.
 
Voting is not a way to determine truth or virtue. It is merely a way to delegate authority. There's no better way to do it than the universal suffrage according to the one person - one vote rule. It is a horrible, idiotic way - but still the best, considering alternatives.

The real line of defense lays beyond delegating authority. OK, it is delegated. What are the "authorized" supposed to do - and what are they NOT supposed to do, what are the limits of their power? These are the real questions.
 
Most voters are ignorant of who they are voting for, especially as they move down the ticket. Like who really knows the judge or state senator for whom they are casting a ballot.

Plus politicians lie. The one they may think that they know may be just a show designed to gather more votes.
 
there is no way to test for willful ignorance without transgressing a huge personal barrier.
 
Should willfully ignorant people be allowed to vote? Or should voter be required to document that they have done a reasonable effort at researching candidates and issues to obtain a voter I.D.? Should equal use of both Democrat and Republican news sources be part of the definition of reasonable effort? Should people who are unemployed have to spend more time on research than the employed, to qualify as a reasonable effort? with each person's search documentation attached to their identity and subject to a challenge, and the way they voted remaining anonymous? Should we make it easier to obtain voter I.D. than it presently is, by eliminating proof of current residence as a requirement, which poses an unnecessary hardship on the poor and minorities?

Part of me wants to say yes.But our elected officials would find ways to screw voters. Besides that It would be easier to ban party affiliations on the ballot and just make a short list of what the candidate stands and past votes that support those positions for under his or her name and then maybe on the voting booth walls have a more thorough list of what the candidate stands for and past votes, may at busy polls have a booklet that voters can read while waiting in line. This would help the voters get somewhat informed who they are voting for.

Today its easy as hell to see what a candidate stands for and their past votes.But on the city and state level its not that easy unless that candidate was in the national spotlight.So you really have to base your vote on what the candidate and commercials say.
 
That would eliminate 99% of dp.comers.
 
Should the willfully ignorant be allowed to vote?

But how does one assess ignorance? What defines ignorance in politics? Nobody can have all knowledge of a Person running and all knowledge relating to all subjects/issues that relate to politics. Therefore, we are all ignorant of many things, and if that information is available to us, then we are willfully ignorant. So what level of ignorance is tolerable? What issues should ignorance be allowed? And what about willful stupidity? That being when people have the available knowledge but can't come to reasoned and logical conclusions but use emotional rational?

Sure, I would like to see an end to ignorance and stupidity in politics. But how would we accomplish it? Who would chose which answers on a test are correct? For me, it is easy to spot the willfully ignorant and stupid, they use names like Socialist, progressive and Liberal. But, well, that is my opinion and if they are in charge of the test, I am pretty sure that many of my beliefs would fall under their definition of willfully ignorant and stupid. I am of course correct, but in politics, being correct is not necessarily being right.
 
Absolutely. I'm certainly in favor of encouraging voters to be well informed about their decisions, but in the end, neither I nor the government should be granted the right to dictate on what grounds voters base their decisions on, or set arbitrary knowledge standards in order to weed out "undesirables."
 
every citizen's right to vote should remain unobstructed. I'm not even that comfortable with taking voting rights away from felons who have completed their sentences.
 
You shouldn't take the right to vote away from any citizen. Ignorant or not...it is their right to exercise.
 
The problem is that getting an objective, non-biased definition of "willfully ignorant" is vanishingly improbable in the politically polarized society we have today.


In short, it would be abused to disinfranchise those someone disagrees with.
 
Should willfully ignorant people be allowed to vote? Or should voter be required to document that they have done a reasonable effort at researching candidates and issues to obtain a voter I.D.? Should equal use of both Democrat and Republican news sources be part of the definition of reasonable effort? Should people who are unemployed have to spend more time on research than the employed, to qualify as a reasonable effort? with each person's search documentation attached to their identity and subject to a challenge, and the way they voted remaining anonymous? Should we make it easier to obtain voter I.D. than it presently is, by eliminating proof of current residence as a requirement, which poses an unnecessary hardship on the poor and minorities?
I have found that the willfully ignorant are often informed and would pass any test given to determine if they are informed. This is because there isn’t an actual, real, deterministic relationship between ignorant and informed. The most informed can be the most ignorant. A test that would be neat, but can’t be done, would be to test if the voter understood what will happen if he is a member of the majority in the vote. But that test can't be given for obvious reasons.
 
People should have to take a test to vote, like that for citizenship.
 
what does that even mean? just because i dont have a have a collage degree or hi paying job, i shouldnt vote? i live in this country and should have a say regardless of how important i am
 
There should be an IQ test before being allowed to register to vote ... even though 13% of the population, the darker among us, would fail.
 
Most voters are ignorant of who they are voting for, especially as they move down the ticket. Like who really knows the judge or state senator for whom they are casting a ballot.

Do we need reform ?
Why must we have to vote for judges ?
When I am faced with this , I do NOT vote; knowing and frustrated that this does no good..
I either do not vote or I use the Women's Voting Guide which helps a little.
So, should the ignorant be allowed to vote ?
Of course, this is a bit better than allowing some know-it-all to determine who votes and who does not...
IMO, there is no man who should be allowed to do this..
And I think that it is impossible for a man to be "willfully ignorant"...
 
I strongly support weighting votes based on the knowledge of the voter. IMO, it's embarrassing that we use a system where the vote of a political genius counts the same as someone who votes based solely on the skin colors of the candidates.
You must know that this cannot work....
The political genius does not exist
No man is going to admit to any bias..
But, if we have a politically knowledgeable man , he may be able to sway others to accept his position and thus make his vote more powerful.
 
I strongly support weighting votes based on the knowledge of the voter. IMO, it's embarrassing that we use a system where the vote of a political genius counts the same as someone who votes based solely on the skin colors of the candidates.

One man one vote.

Every one's vote should be equal In strength.
 
Back
Top Bottom