|
|
|
|
#1
12-29-2005, 05:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Conditional Suffrage?
Well, maybe, but Kerry supporters will fail their's since even the candidates don't really know where they stand.
BTW, if people are annoyed with the way politics work today (which everyone should be) they should probably not focus on disenfrancising people of which they think less and start focusing on the real problems such as the role of lobbyists, the close connection between the congress and their families, the military, the private sector and the lobby firms or the hijacking of elections using new and improved computer vote rigging machines or the power of a consolidated media. 
|
|
#2
12-29-2005, 07:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conditional Suffrage?
[ QUOTE ]
BTW, if people are annoyed with the way politics work today (which everyone should be) they should probably not focus on disenfrancising people of which they think less [/ QUOTE ] The fact that I don't think highly of someone doesn't automatically mean I don't want them to vote, nor does the fact that I do think highly of someone mean that I DO want them to vote. Example: I don't think highly of overpaid NY transit workers who went on strike to get more money; however, a lot of them are competent enough to vote. Other example: I think highly of my friends, but a few of them are too stupid to vote for president.
|
|
#3
12-29-2005, 05:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conditional Suffrage?
[ QUOTE ]
A short quiz on where the presidential candidates stand on major issues would be a good prerequisite. [/ QUOTE ] I disagree, since "where the presidential candidates stand on major issues" can be difficult to frame objectively. A much better prerequisite test, if there is to be one, would examine two objectively measurable skills of great importance: 1) logic, and 2) reading comprehension.
|
|
#4
12-29-2005, 05:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conditional Suffrage?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] A short quiz on where the presidential candidates stand on major issues would be a good prerequisite. [/ QUOTE ] I disagree, since "where the presidential candidates stand on major issues" can be difficult to frame objectively. A much better prerequisite test, if there is to be one, would examine two objectively measurable skills of great importance: 1) logic, and 2) reading comprehension. [/ QUOTE ] That is how things were in the south until the 60's/70's... do you really think it's a good idea?
|
|
#5
12-29-2005, 07:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conditional Suffrage?
[ QUOTE ]
Didn't they used to do this in the south? I don't think this is a good idea because of how easily it is to misuse. [/ QUOTE ] They did it based on race. That wasn't what I was proposing. Read my post.
|
|
#6
12-29-2005, 04:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conditional Suffrage?
My plan would allow for longer time periods of actual voting. It would also create 2 categories of sufferage. There would be some sort of basic competency test. And those people would no longer require representation and would be allowed to vote directly on issues. Other who could not pass the competency test would still have sufferage to vote for representatives.
|
|
#8
12-29-2005, 05:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conditional Suffrage?
[ QUOTE ]
I wonder how many people proposing a civic's knowledge test as a voting requirement could actually pass the test they advocate. [/ QUOTE ] Well the test can be fashioned in a manner to get any % you would like. Because of the way that polititians work, It is a bad idea to have these tests. But I would venture a guess that between 10% and 35% of the population would be qualified to have a direct vote on issues. I have no way of actually knowing what the political powers would chose to test, so I can't give an accurate answer. The rest would still require representation. I think the test should be fahioned not on candidates but on The Consitution, ethics, and government knowledge. I also wonder how many polititians would be able to pass it? There needs to be a migration from representative democracy toward direct democracy.
|
|
#9
12-29-2005, 05:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Conditional Suffrage?
Maybe the politicians should have to fill out a standardized questionaire. Instead, they are marketed by the same PR folks who make toothpaste commercials.
Nice to see the John Kerry smear campaign was effective. When the facts change, I change my opinion, what do you do?
|
|
#10
12-29-2005, 05:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
jimmy carter and suffragemandering
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe the politicians should have to fill out a standardized questionaire. Instead, they are marketed by the same PR folks who make toothpaste commercials. Nice to see the John Kerry smear campaign was effective. When the facts change, I change my opinion, what do you do? [/ QUOTE ]Jimmy Carter summed up the results of the 2004 election pretty well. 10% of the population votes for the sitting president during times of war. If a test was introduced how do you think each party would suffragemander it, so that only people who vote for them would be able to vote.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
