hops_scout Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 i believe that law was passed because it was considered racist because the entire purpose was to prevent African Americans from voting. This, in turn, continued to make them seem like second-class citizens with fewer rights than the Caucasions. I feel you should have to pass some sort of test. Even if it is a short one and very simple it will still prevent some from voting. Hey, maybe they should have to explain shortly why they vote for who. Anything but "He's Republican or He's Democrat" would qualify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevorum Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 I strongly disagree. Universal suffrage means just that. Everybody over 18. Who do you want to prevent from voting? People who can't read? People who can't speak English? People who wher born in a foreign country? People who think Jefferson was a running back? People who have an IQ lower than 75? People who commit immoral acts? People who wear white hoods? People who worship false gods? People who belong to fringe parties? People who think dangerous thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScout Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 I think voter qualifications should be decided by the people, through their elected state legislatures. That way the values and traditions of each locality can be respected. This was how it was done for over a century until the federal government got involved and stuck its nose in like it does with everything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR540Beaver Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Jefferson wasn't a running back? Next you're going to tell me we don't get french benefits. The obvious answer to who you don't let vote is.......anyone who doesn't think like me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beavah Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 An old friend and fellow Beavah once told me "when in doubt, vote for gridlock." Split control at least will stop anyone from railroading an agenda through without debate. I wonder if I can vote McCain-Lieberman in the next election? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funscout Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 I vote primarily Republican because that's the party that supports my 3 big issues: 1. Morality similar to my views 2. National Security 3. Lower taxes There are some issues I disagree with in the Republican party, but I chose my 3 top issues, and went with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GernBlansten Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 I'm not saying we should turn away uninformed voters, I'm just saying that we shouldn't make it easy for them. Make the ballots so that only the informed voters know what they are actually voting for. Those who don't know the issues or the party affiliation of their candidate can vote randomly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScout Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Why should a voter not be able to vote for a canidate because they like his personality and/or trust him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoutldr Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 That would be fine...and a lot better than many voters, especially the youngest (MTV set) and many of the oldest ones (there should at least be a test for dementia before a ballot is issued, regardless of age). If they "like his personality and trust him", that tells me they at least know who's running and why. To get a flavor for what I mean, tune in to the Sean Hannity radio show when he does his "man on the street" interviews in downtown Manhattan. These are the clueless people who are cancelling out your votes. They've NEVER HEARD of Cheney, Condoleeza, Colin Powell, or even Kerry, but they can quote the names and lyrics of 25 Rap songs. And most of them are recent high school graduates. Scary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevorum Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Admittedly, there are LOTS of clueless people in this world, and yes, some of them vote. However, I take issue with the concept that someone "cancels out" my vote. By that logic, the last election was decided only by 50,000 people in Ohio. The rest of us could have stayed home since we all cancelled each other! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR540Beaver Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 scoutldr, The other side of that scary equation are all of the people who vote simply based on what Hannity and other pundits say. For many, it is easier to be spoon fed than to cook the meal themself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScout Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 What if the voter likes Hannity's views and trusts his opinions and votes for a canidate for that reason. What business of yours is it why someone votes for a canidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now