Should People Be Forced To Vote Or Pay A Fine?

[Born Free]

I am a "Leftie" and I certainly don't think that way.

In fact I can't remember any other "Leftie" stating they think that way, vote or pay a fine.

Actually that flies in the face of every argument I have seen Leftie's make that forcing folks to pay for Photo ID's is in essence a "Poll Tax" and thus illegal or unconstitutional.

How about Obamacare's individual mandate, buy insurance or pay a tax, that was all lefties, not one Republican voted for Obamacare.

 

[Born Free]

I actually favor a civics test before being allowed to vote. With rights comes responsibilities. If you want the right to vote, you have the responsibility to be an informed voter.

Many think the same way, and I agree.

 

[Bodi]

"Fewer" people...

Or less... less works too...

 

[LastResort20]

Historically, higher turnout rates have meant better results for the Democrats. That's why Repubs are trying to restrict voting.

*Nothing wrong with turnout rates....as long as they are **legal voters .... **alive and `no cheating involved`....This might not set well with Democrats who want open borders and now are trying to get (public school) indoctrinated 16 year old kids to vote.

 

[LastResort20]

I actually favor a civics test before being allowed to vote. With rights comes responsibilities. If you want the right to vote, you have the responsibility to be an informed voter.

Well said and makes sense there Waddy!

 

[Irwin Corey]

Only if election day is made a mandatory paid holiday!

 

[lwf]

I actually favor a civics test before being allowed to vote. With rights comes responsibilities. If you want the right to vote, you have the responsibility to be an informed voter.

Who determines what questions are on the test?

 

[Moderate Right]

I haven't been here that long, could you cite some of these Lefties stating that they think that is their best chance of winning elections?

Thanks!

Welcome to the forum! I think you should already know that lefties and even common knowledge of voting dictates that elections with higher turnouts usually favor Democrats. If I post something that is debatable you can ask me for links but for common knowledge I really shouldn't have to waste my time doing that. I'm also not going to post any links that the sun will rise tomorrow.

 

[WillyPete]

I have to confess, I can't tell if you are serious or being sarcastic.

Why not both?

I'm serious in that if we applied it properly I think it would be an improvement over the status quo.

They monetize people. Why not their votes? It would provide major incentive for people to vote, even if indirectly.

Key to it would be the ability of the voter to move their proxy as their views change or new options become available.

Honestly, I expect it would be mismanaged\manipulated so badly it wouldn't go well, but then what does anymore? Might as well get paid.

 

[LouC]

How about Obamacare's individual mandate, buy insurance or pay a tax, that was all lefties, not one Republican voted for Obamacare.

Are you trying to deflect or just outright change the subject?

The PPACA was and still is an abomination of legislation. It was birthed at a time I was still a happily registered Republican. I opposed it then as I oppose it now. Even though I am now a happily registered Democrat.

Sadly I watched as too many Republicans in Congress took the position of not embracing what was going to be done by the Democrats, with or without them, and then after it was passed standing there like a clone army of idiot Bart Simpsons in unison saying "I didn't do it" as if that absolved them of any guilt for what was crafted.

Howaboutism is fun!

How about the pointless, what was it, 60 or more "repeal" votes by Republicans when they knew they had absolutely ZERO chance to actually repeal the PPACA?

Then when they ruled the House, the Senate, the White House, and the freaking Supreme Court not only did they not "repeal" the PPACA they didn't even "replace" the PPACA as they promised to do, as Obese Donald Trump promised to do.

 

[Helix]

Should People Be Forced To Vote Or Pay A Fine?

no, because that would be dumb.

 

[LouC]

Welcome to the forum! I think you should already know that lefties and even common knowledge of voting dictates that elections with higher turnouts usually favor Democrats. If I post something that is debatable you can ask me for links but for common knowledge I really shouldn't have to waste my time doing that. I'm also not going to post any links that the sun will rise tomorrow.

So you can't cite any "Lefties" here stating what you claimed they have stated?

Sorry to hear that.

Thanks for the welcome to the Forum, though.

 

[Moderate Right]

Why not both?

I'm serious in that if we applied it properly I think it would be an improvement over the status quo.

They monetize people. Why not their votes? It would provide major incentive for people to vote, even if indirectly.

Key to it would be the ability of the voter to move their proxy as their views change or new options become available.

Honestly, I expect it would be mismanaged\manipulated so badly it wouldn't go well, but then what does anymore? Might as well get paid.

OK. I'll mark you down in the sarcastic column. But, I do kind of understand where you are coming from. You're basically saying, "What is the difference in the mega rich and powerful buying your vote through marketing or just giving you money to vote their way"? It's kind of like eliminating the middle man and bypassing the advertisements and just giving the money directly to you. As I said, I'll mark you down in the sarcastic column.

 

[Moderate Right]

So you can't cite any "Lefties" here stating what you claimed they have stated?

Sorry to hear that.

Thanks for the welcome to the Forum, though.

I hope you learn more during your time here and as you read more threads. I'm not going to link to you obvious information. It is common knowledge that higher voter turnouts favor Democrats. Do you actually deny this?

 

[Skeptic Bob]

My kneejerk reaction is that it should be mandatory. But after a little thought I end up saying "no". Because do I really want to force people who don't even pay attention to politics and issues to vote? That is like randomly guessing at a multiple choice test. I don't see how that would make things better? Hell, simple name recognition and advertising dollars would determine who wins even more than it does now, which is already too much.

 

[LouC]

I hope you learn more during your time here and as you read more threads. I'm not going to link to you obvious information. It is common knowledge that higher voter turnouts favor Democrats. Do you actually deny this?

That has nothing to do with what I asked of you according to what you adamantly claimed.

The question of higher voter turnout favoring Democrats is an interesting one. Not denying there seems to be some correlation for it.
Does High Voter Turnout Favor Democrats? - OPaM

But it is decidedly obvious that goodly numbers of Republicans in States where there is Republican control of the methods and means of voting rights believe that higher turnout favors the Democratic Party.

Why else would there be so many concerted efforts in these Republican controlled states to enact laws and rules to suppress or depress voter turnout, in particular, among those voting demographics that favor Democratic candidates and causes.

 

[Moderate Right]

That has nothing to do with what I asked of you according to what you adamantly claimed.

The question of higher voter turnout favoring Democrats is an interesting one. Not denying there seems to be some correlation for it.
Does High Voter Turnout Favor Democrats? - OPaM

But it is decidedly obvious that goodly numbers of Republicans in States where there is Republican control of the methods and means of voting rights believe that higher turnout favors the Democratic Party.

Why else would there be so many concerted efforts in these Republican controlled states to enact laws and rules to suppress or depress voter turnout, in particular, among those voting demographics that favor Democratic candidates and causes.

Nice dodge. Even you seem to know that what I said is the truth.

 

[Bezukhov]

What would happen to me if such a scheme were to implemented? I have perfected the fine art of turning in a ballot without casting a vote. Like the 2018 election. That years theme was Groucho Marx. I wrote in the names of the characters he played. Rufus T. Firefly for governor, Capt Jeffery Spaulding to cogress, and so on.

What's the point? It's my way of giving the system the middle finger. It's very cathartic.

My write in for the 2016 president's race was Bozo the Clown. Given the almost universal belief among Evangelicals that God made Trump president perhaps God told whoever was looking at my ballot to count my vote for Bozo as a vote for Trump.

 

[The Mark]

Another thread inspired me to post this poll. I think some lefties here on DP feel that Democrats best chance of winning elections is by forcing people to vote or face a fine as they do in some other countries like Australia. I guess their thinking is that the more people who vote the more will vote Democrat. So, should we up our voter turnout to 90% or more by forcing people to vote or face a fine for not voting?

No.

Voting must be voluntary.

I seriously doubt there's actually any democrat who would suggest such a thing though.

 

[Perotista]

Another thread inspired me to post this poll. I think some lefties here on DP feel that Democrats best chance of winning elections is by forcing people to vote or face a fine as they do in some other countries like Australia. I guess their thinking is that the more people who vote the more will vote Democrat. So, should we up our voter turnout to 90% or more by forcing people to vote or face a fine for not voting?

What that would be doing is taking away the decision of whom would be the next president, senator, congressman or whatever elected office out of the hands of the people who care about who wins and loses and putting the results into the hands of those who don't give a dang.

When one asks why someone voted for so and so, a lot of answers come back like, I love his slogan, he looks presidential, (my wife), my parents voted for him, my friends voted for him, his campaign music theme was hot or I liked his reality TV show. Then there are those who only vote for someone because he is a Republican or Democrat. The R or the D is the only and deciding factor. Not the quality of the candidate or their experience or lack thereof.

Those are examples of those who actually do vote. Now you want to let those who don't give a coyote's howl who is president or senator or congressman or anything else make that decision? That just go in and pick a name on the ballot not know anything at all about whom they just voted for or the office that person would hold.

I think not.

 

[rocket88]

I wouldn't want to be the party known for forcing people to vote or pay a fine. I think the definition for that is found under the word "backfire".

I don't think it should be mandatory, I'm just saying that higher turnout is usually favorable to Dems

 

[rocket88]

*Nothing wrong with turnout rates....as long as they are **legal voters .... **alive and `no cheating involved`....This might not set well with Democrats who want open borders and now are trying to get (public school) indoctrinated 16 year old kids to vote.

Nobody favors open borders. At least nobody in the mainstream.

That doesn't explain why Repubs are constantly trying to shut down early voting.

 

[noonereal]

What that would be doing is taking away the decision of whom would be the next president, senator, congressman or whatever elected office out of the hands of the people who care about who wins and loses and putting the results into the hands of those who don't give a dang.

.

It would simply be a different approach.

People are not comfortable with change so it will never happen.

As we do it is no better it's simply what we are accustomed to, comfortable with.

 

[gulfman]

If someone votes and doesn't vote Republican then they should be fined

 

[Moderate Right]

I don't think it should be mandatory, I'm just saying that higher turnout is usually favorable to Dems

You should explain that to LouC, who doesn't think I can provide a link to members here on DP who admit that higher turnout is usually favorable to Dems. I really don't know why he seems to dispute that.