Re: Conditional Suffrage?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The left would claim the test is racist.

[/ QUOTE ] And the right would secretly harbor feelings of racial superiority?

[ QUOTE ]
There needs to be a migration from representative democracy toward mob rule.

[/ QUOTE ] I never said anything about getting rid of the courts.

Re: Conditional Suffrage?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the test should be fahioned not on candidates but on The Consitution, ethics, and government knowledge.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cool, then let's start testing you immediately.

I'll start by testing your personal financial ethics, then move on to your knowledge of the Bill of Rights and the limited power of the executive branch, along with your true understanding (or lack thereof) of fundamental American civil rights and the 14th Amendment.

I'll happily email you your score, once I've decided whether or not you're intelligent and informed enough to be allowed to vote.

And if I just happen to discover that a large number of Republicans are just too misinformed and/or ignorant to be allowed to vote, well, I'm sure you'll have no problem with that.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I also wonder how many polititians would be able to pass it?

[/ QUOTE ]

The left would claim the test is racist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course not. The fact that, under my test, white Republican Party members will be disenfranchised at 4x the rate of other demographic groups is just a statistical anomaly, and I'm sure you'll have no problem with that either.



q/q

Re: Conditional Suffrage? The answer is no.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Educated people already vote much more often than uneducated.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your point? Does the fact that you have a college degree or a PHD mean you know anything about politics or what is good for this country?

[ QUOTE ]
From your subjective view that voters are uneducated?

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't you mean "from your objective view that less than 100% of the people who are registered voters are competent enough to exercise the privilege?"

[ QUOTE ]
Take a look at the statistics. The people you want to restrict from voting already don't vote.

[/ QUOTE ]

I take this to mean that you are assuming that I believe that 100% of uneducated people are not qualified to vote and therefore should have their right to vote taken away. Even though that is completely wrong and not even close to what I said (you know, since I didn't even mention education at all), I'll humor you.

Assume that 100% of the uneducated vote for the wrong guy (according to me). If we define "uneducated" to mean "didn't finish high school," then according to the link you provided, over ten million people voted for the "wrong guy" in the last election. Even if half the people voted for the right guy, that's still five million who voted for the wrong guy in a race that was decided by less than 4 million votes.

I'm fairly confident that you're assuming I'm a Republican or Libertarian, since conditional suffrage is not something typically promoted by the Democratic party (if at all)... meaning that you believe I want to somehow rig the system so that the Republican candidate has an unfair advantage. If that is the case, does your "the people you want to restrict from voting already don't vote" comment mean that you are saying that people who are uneducated vote Democrat? I don't think that's the case at all. The fact that a friend of mine, who is an HS dropout, voted Republican seems like a good enough counterexample to me.

I have a better idea: Why don't we stop talking about education and start talking about voter competence, which is what this thread is supposed to be about anyway.

Re: Conditional Suffrage?
 

[ QUOTE ]
And the right would secretly harbor feelings of racial superiority?

[/ QUOTE ]

NAACP says requiring photo ID at the polls is racist
[ QUOTE ]
Violates the 1965 Voting Rights Act because it results in the denial of voting rights to African-American and Latino voters.

[/ QUOTE ]

A racial fuss is made over photo ID and you don't think someone's going to form the same kind of fuss over requiring people to know who the current president is in order to vote for the next one?

[ QUOTE ]
I never said anything about getting rid of the courts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't say you did.

A representative democracy exists to prevent the ignorant masses from taking advantage of the minority. By what stretch of logic are we permitting the same ignorant masses, from whom our representative democracy was created to protect our country, to vote for said representatives?

Re: Conditional Suffrage?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'll start by testing your personal financial ethics, then move on to your knowledge of the Bill of Rights and the limited power of the executive branch, along with your true understanding (or lack thereof) of fundamental American civil rights and the 14th Amendment.

I'll happily email you your score, once I've decided whether or not you're intelligent and informed enough to be allowed to vote.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh gee, that's not fair! I was planning on being exempt from the test and being the only person in the country eligible to vote for anything. Darn.

Post your multiple choice / true or false / matching test (since those are the only two types of tests that can be objective). I'm confident that most people on this forum, both Republican and Democrat, will pass.

[ QUOTE ]
And if I just happen to discover that a large number of Republicans are just too misinformed and/or ignorant to be allowed to vote, well, I'm sure you'll have no problem with that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if you will have no problem with the potentially equally large number of misinformed Democrats being found incompetent to vote... actually, the number may be larger, due to OtisTheMarsupial's claim that uneducated people typically vote Democrat.

[ QUOTE ]
Of course not. The fact that, under my test, white Republican Party members will be disenfranchised at 4x the rate of other demographic groups is just a statistical anomaly, and I'm sure you'll have no problem with that either.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, your test will be opinion-based rather than fact-based, then? I mean, it would have to be, since white Republican Party members have the same facts as every other demographic, but surely have different opinions.

Discriminating people based on their opinions now are we???

Re: Conditional Suffrage?
 

****whoosh****

(that sound you just heard was the point going right over the top of your head)


q/q

Re: Conditional Suffrage?
 

[ QUOTE ]

****whoosh****

(that sound you just heard was the point going right over the top of your head)

[/ QUOTE ]

*** cricket *** ***cricket ***

(that sound you just heard was a representation of how impressed I am with your wittiness)

If the point clearly went over my head, why don't you explain it less cryptically...? Or better yet, just plain explain it.

Re: Conditional Suffrage?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Right now, to the best of my knowledge, the only requirements to register to vote and do so are:

1) 18 years of age or older.
2) Be a US citizen.
3) Not be a convicted felon.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think "conditional suffrage" is a bad idea. But I also think condition #3 on voting (I know, it's state by state, not federal) is outrageous.

Re: Conditional Suffrage?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Right now, to the best of my knowledge, the only requirements to register to vote and do so are:

1) 18 years of age or older.
2) Be a US citizen.
3) Not be a convicted felon.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think "conditional suffrage" is a bad idea. But I also think condition #3 on voting (I know, it's state by state, not federal) is outrageous.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I really don't see what condition #3 has to do with it at all.

Re: Conditional Suffrage?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Right now, to the best of my knowledge, the only requirements to register to vote and do so are:

1) 18 years of age or older.
2) Be a US citizen.
3) Not be a convicted felon.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think "conditional suffrage" is a bad idea. But I also think condition #3 on voting (I know, it's state by state, not federal) is outrageous.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I really don't see what condition #3 has to do with it at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's worse than that. Convict political enemies of some vague "undermining national interests" felony and they can't vote you out of office.