• 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 anyone vote?

Should anyone vote?

  • Total voters
    18
NeverTrump

NeverTrump

Exposing GOP since 2015
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
25,357
Reaction score
11,557
Location
Post-Trump America
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Should anyone be allowed the right to vote? I'm not talking about race or gender discrimination. I'm talking about a simple general test that should be decided upon if that person is deemed eligible to vote.

This can be something as simple as: who is the current speaker of the house. I don't see how if you have gotten an education and you pay attention to the political world you wouldn't be able to answer the question.

Albeit there are ways around this and one can just simply look up that question on Google before entering into the voting area, but I think if Trump wins the election there will be serious talks about this type of stuff underway. Because we may need more checks and balances.
 
The simplest solution is to let us americans feel the burn of our apathy. Trump might just be the ticket, it's why I'm voting for him, lol.
 
There should be a minimum level of knowledge that we are tested on prior to voting. No pass... no vote.
 
ModerateGOP said:
Should anyone be allowed the right to vote? I'm not talking about race or gender discrimination. I'm talking about a simple general test that should be decided upon if that person is deemed eligible to vote.

This can be something as simple as: who is the current speaker of the house. I don't see how if you have gotten an education and you pay attention to the political world you wouldn't be able to answer the question.

Albeit there are ways around this and one can just simply look up that question on Google before entering into the voting area, but I think if Trump wins the election there will be serious talks about this type of stuff underway. Because we may need more checks and balances.
Click to expand...

Robert Heinlein once said that there should be a test in order to vote, that one should be able to, for instance, be able to solve a quadratic equation prior to being allowed to vote. And he's horribly wrong.

Don't get me wrong - I've been a fan of Heinlein since my youth. But he didn't think this one through. For instance, look at the hundred of thousands of caregivers in America - who go to work every day, wiping butts, cooking and feeding and washing and cleaning and so forth...they work hard, and their work is not easy. It can be fulfilling, but it's not easy. Most caregivers don't have more than a high-school degree, and often not even that...but lack of formal education is not the same as lack of intelligence or lack of awareness.

If Heinlein had had his way, very few of these caregivers would be able to vote...because very few of them know algebra or remember it from high school...and this is even though in his sunset years, he probably had caregivers waiting on him hand-and-foot to keep him comfortable and happy.

So...who judges? And how could we possibly set standards that were not unfair to one more more large demographics? I don't think it could be rationally done.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Robert Heinlein once said that there should be a test in order to vote, that one should be able to, for instance, be able to solve a quadratic equation prior to being allowed to vote. And he's horribly wrong.

Don't get me wrong - I've been a fan of Heinlein since my youth. But he didn't think this one through. For instance, look at the hundred of thousands of caregivers in America - who go to work every day, wiping butts, cooking and feeding and washing and cleaning and so forth...they work hard, and their work is not easy. It can be fulfilling, but it's not easy. Most caregivers don't have more than a high-school degree, and often not even that...but lack of formal education is not the same as lack of intelligence or lack of awareness.

If Heinlein had had his way, very few of these caregivers would be able to vote...because very few of them know algebra or remember it from high school...and this is even though in his sunset years, he probably had caregivers waiting on him hand-and-foot to keep him comfortable and happy.

So...who judges? And how could we possibly set standards that were not unfair to one more more large demographics? I don't think it could be rationally done.
Click to expand...

Pretty easy honestly. how about the same civics test that is given to immigrants who want to be citizens? I bet a significant portion of born citizens couldn't pass it.
 
ModerateGOP said:
Should anyone be allowed the right to vote? I'm not talking about race or gender discrimination. I'm talking about a simple general test that should be decided upon if that person is deemed eligible to vote.

This can be something as simple as: who is the current speaker of the house. I don't see how if you have gotten an education and you pay attention to the political world you wouldn't be able to answer the question.

Albeit there are ways around this and one can just simply look up that question on Google before entering into the voting area, but I think if Trump wins the election there will be serious talks about this type of stuff underway. Because we may need more checks and balances.
Click to expand...
I think laws banning open primaries and banning party changing during the primary will prevent a lot of rat ****ing by opposing parties. Laws asking for ID that is not issued to illegals can also help enure that only citizens vote.


As to general political knowledge tests I think as you pointed out anyone could look on google. Also I couldn't trust the tests to be neutral. I also think that eve when they know the facts they still don't care.Think about how many Trump-tards there are on this forum that have been informed of the liberal positions Trump supported, his hypocrisy, lies and constant flip flops, the fact Trump supported and donated liberal democrats and establishment RINO republicans and has even loved a couple of those liberal democrats so much that he had a couple show up to his wedding.But yet even after being informed about all that the Trump-tards still do not care and many use the But that was yesterday he said that excuse or some variation of it or claim it was just a necessary evil to help his business.
 
disneydude said:
That would result in the end of the Republican party.
Click to expand...

No, but it would end voting priviliges for a vast majority of the American society. Some of the biggest political idiots I ever met were Liberal. Many were Conservative but idiocy knows all political ideologies... but you kinda hack about casting one sided aspersions in general, right?
 
SocialD said:
Pretty easy honestly. how about the same civics test that is given to immigrants who want to be citizens? I bet a significant portion of born citizens couldn't pass it.
Click to expand...

Just like Heinlein's 'quadratic equation' solution, that sounds great in theory, but would suck in practice. For instance, are you really going to tell, say, a 94 year-old woman that she can't vote because she didn't pass a test? And when you've got thousands of people coming to vote at a location, think of the logistics nightmare - having enough people to proctor the test, allowing for enough time for everyone in line to have a reasonable chance to vote, and so on.

And why is it that conservatives are always so eager to make it harder to vote, but want to make it easier to buy any kind of gun they want?
 
Every adult citizen should be allowed to vote. Voting is a fundamental right and any "test" designed to limit that right is invariably going to be used by the party in power to control dissent.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Just like Heinlein's 'quadratic equation' solution, that sounds great in theory, but would suck in practice. For instance, are you really going to tell, say, a 94 year-old woman that she can't vote because she didn't pass a test? And when you've got thousands of people coming to vote at a location, think of the logistics nightmare - having enough people to proctor the test, allowing for enough time for everyone in line to have a reasonable chance to vote, and so on.

And why is it that conservatives are always so eager to make it harder to vote, but want to make it easier to buy any kind of gun they want?
Click to expand...

yea the logistics of it would be bad your right. and for your gun analogy, ive never advocated making it easier.
 
No reason to limit voting. The establishment should not be able to create some bogus test that doesn't really equate to knowledge of politics. There would be bias in any test. Not sure why you want to throw on group of voters under the bus without any evidence.
 
Bodhisattva said:
No, but it would end voting priviliges for a vast majority of the American society. Some of the biggest political idiots I ever met were Liberal. Many were Conservative but idiocy knows all political ideologies... but you kinda hack about casting one sided aspersions in general, right?
Click to expand...

I agree with you on one level....however my experience is opposite yours. While there are fools across the political spectrum, I have found them more heavily clustered around the Republican/Conservative spectrum. How thousands of Americans continuously vote against their own economic interests is very telling.
 
Poll tests have been ruled unconstitutional for a reason.

If you want to see Heinlein's most exclusionary idea at work, Starship Troopers would be it--only those that have joined the military and offered to defend their planet (future sci-fi) are eligible for the vote. The idea is that only those willing to sacrifice should be able to exercise voting rights.
 
ModerateGOP said:
Should anyone be allowed the right to vote? I'm not talking about race or gender discrimination. I'm talking about a simple general test that should be decided upon if that person is deemed eligible to vote.

This can be something as simple as: who is the current speaker of the house. I don't see how if you have gotten an education and you pay attention to the political world you wouldn't be able to answer the question.

Albeit there are ways around this and one can just simply look up that question on Google before entering into the voting area, but I think if Trump wins the election there will be serious talks about this type of stuff underway. Because we may need more checks and balances.
Click to expand...

Ideally, no one would vote because their would be no elections. Insofar as their are elections, the franchise should be restricted as much as possible. Women definitely should not be allowed to vote.
 
ModerateGOP said:
Should anyone be allowed the right to vote? I'm not talking about race or gender discrimination. I'm talking about a simple general test that should be decided upon if that person is deemed eligible to vote.

This can be something as simple as: who is the current speaker of the house. I don't see how if you have gotten an education and you pay attention to the political world you wouldn't be able to answer the question.

Albeit there are ways around this and one can just simply look up that question on Google before entering into the voting area, but I think if Trump wins the election there will be serious talks about this type of stuff underway. Because we may need more checks and balances.
Click to expand...

This country wasn't built of putting restriction on voters so a person you don't agree with doesn't get elected. Although many have tried and succeeded. With that being said, no there shouldn't be any. Every citizen has the right to vote, not having such compromises the very value our country was founded on.
 
ModerateGOP said:
Should anyone be allowed the right to vote? I'm not talking about race or gender discrimination. I'm talking about a simple general test that should be decided upon if that person is deemed eligible to vote.

This can be something as simple as: who is the current speaker of the house. I don't see how if you have gotten an education and you pay attention to the political world you wouldn't be able to answer the question.

Albeit there are ways around this and one can just simply look up that question on Google before entering into the voting area, but I think if Trump wins the election there will be serious talks about this type of stuff underway. Because we may need more checks and balances.
Click to expand...

If you've never seen the poll tests of old days, you don't know how maliciously designed they were.
You could fail them at the discretion of the tester, because some of the questions were rather interpretive.

I don't know, but considering how horridly maligned Trump supporters are being treated, I'd lean no.
 
I kinda like the test idea. Rather than fail people for incorrect answers, I think it would be best to give people the correct answer if they are misinformed. The idea to test people in my scenario would be used less for determining eligible voters, and used more for reminding voters what they should be considering to be a good candidate. How a test like this could be administered and to what effect, I have no idea.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Poll tests have been ruled unconstitutional for a reason.

If you want to see Heinlein's most exclusionary idea at work, Starship Troopers would be it--only those that have joined the military and offered to defend their planet (future sci-fi) are eligible for the vote. The idea is that only those willing to sacrifice should be able to exercise voting rights.
Click to expand...

You'd have to figure out a way for people who can't normally participate, to join the military.
Disabled folks, those who aren't disabled but have bum legs, etc.

The Israelis are doing some interesting stuff with autistic young people.
 
All citizens have and should have the right to vote.
 
Yes, all adult citizens and I think that felons should have their rights returned to them fully after they are off parole.
 
ModerateGOP said:
Should anyone be allowed the right to vote? I'm not talking about race or gender discrimination. I'm talking about a simple general test that should be decided upon if that person is deemed eligible to vote.

This can be something as simple as: who is the current speaker of the house. I don't see how if you have gotten an education and you pay attention to the political world you wouldn't be able to answer the question.

Albeit there are ways around this and one can just simply look up that question on Google before entering into the voting area, but I think if Trump wins the election there will be serious talks about this type of stuff underway. Because we may need more checks and balances.
Click to expand...
Everyone eligible should vote, in every election, including primaries and whatnot.

All caucuses/primaries should be open - or at least allow voters who have not yet chosen a party to show up, pick one, and vote for the options under it.

--------------

And when I say everyone, I literally mean that - 100% voter participation is the goal.

Ideally there should be readily available and understandable information available for every candidate - impartially provided, of course.
Ideally, everyone should acquire at least rudimentary info on the options.


Edit: One problem is a lack of time and possibly access to do the above, especially for lower income voters.
 
Bodhisattva said:
There should be a minimum level of knowledge that we are tested on prior to voting. No pass... no vote.
Click to expand...
NO, this is wrong ...1
If this is to be so, then all of the candidates must be equally tested . I know this is not right, but a voter should show that he graduated from high school .. but our school standards have become so low ... IMO.
 
ModerateGOP said:
Should anyone be allowed the right to vote? I'm not talking about race or gender discrimination. I'm talking about a simple general test that should be decided upon if that person is deemed eligible to vote.

This can be something as simple as: who is the current speaker of the house. I don't see how if you have gotten an education and you pay attention to the political world you wouldn't be able to answer the question.

Albeit there are ways around this and one can just simply look up that question on Google before entering into the voting area, but I think if Trump wins the election there will be serious talks about this type of stuff underway. Because we may need more checks and balances.
Click to expand...

Yes. One of the most important facets of Democracy is that it empowers the people with the belief, true or not, that they have a voice in the composition of their government and furthermore that the process of creating that government is broadly fair. Restricting the franchise, even if its predicated on some sort of basic knowledge test, reduces that perception and therefore undermines the most fundamental advantage that Democracy has over other forms of government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom