Jump to content



Photo
* - - - - 1 votes

Mike Rowe on Voting, a right not a duty.

mike rowe voting

  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#21 TAHAWK

TAHAWK

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2887 posts

Posted 20 October 2016 - 05:14 PM

The success of democracy presupposes the obligation of the people to inform themselves on critical issues.

 

Or we can sell governmental power like dish detergent.

 

 

All those Presidents that people love to hate were elected.

 

 

Given the candidates for President, at least, the trend is not encouraging.

 

 

So nice to see that, even here, name-calling is still in vogue.


  • 1

#22 TAHAWK

TAHAWK

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2887 posts

Posted 09 November 2016 - 06:54 PM

Yet another right winger complaining that too many stupid leftists vote.

Guess he was wrong about that.


  • 0

#23 SSScout

SSScout

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4033 posts

Posted 10 November 2016 - 07:40 PM

In several months, Mr. Trump will be asked to assume the role of "Honorary President of the Boy Scouts Of America".


  • 0

#24 qwazse

qwazse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 6710 posts

Posted 11 November 2016 - 09:11 AM

In several months, Mr. Trump will be asked to assume the role of "Honorary President of the Boy Scouts Of America".

I'll talk to my crew about preparing an invite for him to come camp with us.

I think Laurel-Highlands Council's decade of "amicable" mergers will impress him.


  • 0

#25 SSScout

SSScout

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4033 posts

Posted 12 November 2016 - 09:39 PM

"" Yet another right winger complaining that too many stupid leftists vote. ""

 

Yep,  the decline in voter apathy is encouraging....

 

First, some people decided that somebody else (not just the king)  should make decisions.  Let's start with "White Male Nobility Property Owners Born In Our Country"

Naw, that's not enough. Let's include ALL White Male Property Owners, not just Nobility. 

Ummmm.   Maybe we should include White Male Property Owners, and White Female Property Owners Over 40 Years Old. (during WW1 in England) Born In Our Country.

Getting better.   Howzabout All White Male And Female Property Owners etc.?   Okay

Now we are somewhere getting.  Let's fight a war and then  allow People Who Are Not White, but can pass a "literacy"  test.....

Okay,  how  about  Anyone Who Is A Citizen (requirements?) and not a felon? 

Good, good.   Let's make it,  "Any Citizen Over 18 years of age who wants to vote " (must voluntarily register in advance).

Now to figure out how to encourage the registering AND voting


  • 0

#26 fred johnson

fred johnson

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 1594 posts

Posted 14 November 2016 - 12:56 PM

"" Yet another right winger complaining that too many stupid leftists vote. ""

 

Yep,  the decline in voter apathy is encouraging....

 

First, some people decided that somebody else (not just the king)  should make decisions.  Let's start with "White Male Nobility Property Owners Born In Our Country"

Naw, that's not enough. Let's include ALL White Male Property Owners, not just Nobility. 

Ummmm.   Maybe we should include White Male Property Owners, and White Female Property Owners Over 40 Years Old. (during WW1 in England) Born In Our Country.

Getting better.   Howzabout All White Male And Female Property Owners etc.?   Okay

Now we are somewhere getting.  Let's fight a war and then  allow People Who Are Not White, but can pass a "literacy"  test.....

Okay,  how  about  Anyone Who Is A Citizen (requirements?) and not a felon? 

Good, good.   Let's make it,  "Any Citizen Over 18 years of age who wants to vote " (must voluntarily register in advance).

Now to figure out how to encourage the registering AND voting

 

There were multiple efforts to restore felon voting rights.

 

Now, I'd also argue there is a desire to get non-citizens to vote too.  IMHO, I think that is what some of the voter ID laws were about.


Edited by fred johnson, 14 November 2016 - 12:57 PM.

  • 0

#27 fred johnson

fred johnson

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 1594 posts

Posted 14 November 2016 - 12:58 PM

In several months, Mr. Trump will be asked to assume the role of "Honorary President of the Boy Scouts Of America".

 

Wow.  Trump as honorary BSA president.  wow.


  • 0

#28 David CO

David CO

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 902 posts

Posted 14 November 2016 - 01:35 PM

Unfortunately, the Honorary President of BSA will have no actual authority to make scouting great again.


  • 0

#29 TAHAWK

TAHAWK

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2887 posts

Posted 14 November 2016 - 01:37 PM

And the Cigar King too.


  • 0

#30 NJCubScouter

NJCubScouter

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 6169 posts

Posted 14 November 2016 - 03:23 PM

Unfortunately, the Honorary President of BSA will have no actual authority to make scouting great again.

 

About 10 different comments suggest themselves here, but for now I won't make any of them.


  • 0

#31 CalicoPenn

CalicoPenn

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3151 posts

Posted 14 November 2016 - 08:11 PM

 

 

Now, I'd also argue there is a desire to get non-citizens to vote too.

 

 

You can argue that all you want - there has never been any facts to back that up.  But we're in a new era - facts really don't matter anymore.


  • 0

#32 Eagledad

Eagledad

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5996 posts

Posted 15 November 2016 - 09:46 AM

You can argue that all you want - there has never been any facts to back that up.  But we're in a new era - facts really don't matter anymore.

I agree, being an Engineer, I like to be as factual as possible. Here is one of many sources to the generalization of perception. This is just one of many sources where the facts, in theory, point to a reasonable argument, and why the cloud will always hang low on the topic.

 

http://hotair.com/ar...mmigrants-vote/

 

Barry


  • 0

"Experience is the hardest teacher. It gives the test first, then the lesson."


#33 gumbymaster

gumbymaster

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 304 posts

Posted 15 November 2016 - 11:06 AM

There seems to be some significant irony in the whole "get out the vote" movement for this election.

 

It has often been the common belief of both the right and left wings that

1. (Left wing) If we just get people (who may not usually vote) to the polls, they will vote for left wing candidates

2. (Right wing) We need to discourage just anyone from voting, because they will vote for left wing candidates.

 

All over the media, you have messages from pop stars urging people to go out and vote because they think that if they do, that those new voters will vote for the candidate that the pop star has made no secrets about whom they support.

 

I loved the line in Mike Rowe's statement where when your friend wants you to get your vote out, see if they will give you a ride to the polls if they think you are voting for the opposite candidate.

 

The analysis of this election clearly turned all these assumptions on their head.

http://www.cnn.com/2...voters-dislike/

 

If the voters who hated everyone had stayed home, we would likely have a different president elect.

 

I am no fan of the Jim Crow laws, but I think an educated (on the issues) voter is important.  I have never, by design, voted a party line, and sometimes it takes a lot of effort for me to decide on a candidate or issue, because (other than for president) the media does not make it easy to make side by side comparisons on their policies or stands (on issues that are actually relevant for the position they are running for).

 

I really don't care what my state senator (as in state house, not Washington DC) believes relative to the selection to United States Supreme Court justices - they will not have any authority over that decision.

 

Even our voter guides out here, only state the issue itself - they no longer offer a paragraph or statement from a supporting and opposing sides.  The local paper used to do a nice piece where they would ask each of the candidates the same questions (relative to the position they were running for), and I could review their answers and select the candidate whose overall position most matched mine.  Sadly the paper has since folded, and no one else has taken up the mantle.

 

My point here is, it is hard to be a voter actually educated on the issues or candidate's relevant positions, but it is important.  Simply voting for whom a Hollywood star says you should, or party lines, or the "apple ballot" is your choice - but may not lead to the results you actually want.


  • 2

#34 qwazse

qwazse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 6710 posts

Posted 16 November 2016 - 09:07 AM

@gumbymaster, aside from your narrow characterization of partisan "get out the vote" strategies, I agree with you about the paucity of voter guides.  I ultimately chose my candidates after clicking through to platforms buried deep in their campaign websites. (Really, how hard is it to just have a plain-text file with the issue in caps, carriage return, line feed, paragraph of opinion and strategy, date accepted, carriage return, line feed, next issue, etc ...?)

 

I would also suggest that merely voting against a candidate is the rough equivalent of stealing your neighbor's vote. My general philosophy: consider the citizen (currently alive) who you admire the most, go down the long list of people running, find the person who most closely hews to that persons character, select him/her. Your neighbors candidate may win, for now. But in the long run, the minority party will begin to pay close attention to such candidates if they are chosen in large numbers.

 

Or, resign yourself to "the way the world works", vote only to block, and be content with your perpetual dissatisfaction.


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


IPB Skin By Virteq