Should voting be earned?

[Padawanbater2]

Probably the one thing we can all agree on is there are a loooooooooooot of stupid fucks inside our borders, for whatever reasons..

Should the voting process be something that is earned instead of something that is given simply by existing for 18 years?

If so, how would you suggest the earning process be? Should someone be required to serve in the military to be able to vote like in Starship Troopers? Should someone take some sort of competency test? If so, who provides the questions, who decides whose 'competent', how do we ensure no corruption exists?

Is this even possible? Is it right/wrong? Is voting an inalienable right guaranteed by the vary values our entire country stands for?


On the surface, it looks wrong, but imo, allowing all people 18 years or older to vote has led to more unforeseen consequences than it has benefits. At 18, I barely had a grasp on politics at all, I was completely unaware of the 'game' that's constantly being played, all I had was other peoples experiences to trust or deny, and cast my vote accordingly. In 2008 I made a mistake, I voted for Obama. Had I known then what I know now, I never would have went to the polls at all or would have written 'FUCK YOU' across the ballot. It also looks 'unamerican' as, for over 200 years we've had this 'right'.. But 200 years ago, the founders could not have anticipated anything like the society in which we live today. Do other aspects of our government need to change as society changes? Is a static government the best for a fluid country?

 

[Nutes and Nugs]

It should be earned as an American citizen of at least 18 years of age.
I'm all for showing ID in November.
Many who voted for Obama last election were under the impression he would give them 'free stuff' and more money in thier pockets.
LOL, if he gets elected again, they will be crying over having to pay for FREE healthcare or goto jail.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Voting should be a punishment.

 

[Padawanbater2]

It should be earned as an American citizen of at least 18 years of age.
I'm all for showing ID in November.
Many who voted for Obama last election were under the impression he would give them 'free stuff' and more money in thier pockets.
LOL, if he gets elected again, they will be crying over having to pay for FREE healthcare or goto jail.

Why should it be given instead of earned?

Just looking at things realistically, he'll likely be elected for another 4 years in Nov. If you look at the current polls and Romney's continuous blunders, that's probably what's going to happen..

Why do you think allowing an 18 year old kid the right to vote for the POTUS is a good thing? Do you have any reasons, facts, data, to support that idea? This is a legitimate question with no ulterior agenda, I'm genuinely interested.


IMO, 35 would be a pretty good age to allow people to vote, perhaps a military service, but I'm a little iffy about that as the military is an institution directly under the supervision of the US gov. so I think you'd likely see some bias there... A test would work, but then comes the problem of the results.. Who'd decide? Inevitably, you would end up with people claiming political bias, how would we ensure that doesn't happen?

Is there a way to make a completely fair and competent system for voting? Do our current politicians rely on uneducated youth? Essentially manipulating their best interests in the hopes of winning the election. IMO, absolutely! There is an entire goddamn industry based behind that that spends billions a year on figuring out what a certain demographic wants to hear. This is something that corrupts the political system. No different than giving a toddler the right to vote.

 

[lokie]

why not just add enough restrictions to eliminate all but the folks that would vote the same as you?

 

[Carne Seca]

Oh yes. Lets bring back the Jim Crow laws. How many beans are in this jar? Oops, sorry. You're not allowed to vote. Great idea. Anytime you put qualifications on basic human rights, someone is getting fucked over.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Oh yes. Lets bring back the Jim Crow laws. How many beans are in this jar? Oops, sorry. You're not allowed to vote. Great idea. Anytime you put qualifications on basic human rights, someone is getting fucked over.

That seems pretty arbitrary, beans in a jar I mean. Today it wouldn't be anything like that, I'm sure you can appreciate the reality of the situation. Jim Crow laws were based on ignorance/racism.. We know better today.

Hopefully, in your opinion, I'm not missing your point, how would we ensure the same thing doesn't happen today with intelligence instead of race, who decides whose 'competent' enough to cast their vote, but like I said in the OP, I don't have the answer for that, I have ideas, but not positive solutions. But the alternative seems to be harming us more than it's benefiting us, and I have to ask you, do you agree with that statement or not? Do you think allowing 18 year old people to vote is doing more good or more bad for the country as a whole, based solely on their level of intelligence and grasp on the current issues that most of America care about?

I just think of myself at 18, which is really all any of us have, personal experiences, and how many times have you guys seen me preach about how useless personal experiences are in regards to scientific findings..? At 18, I was a fucking dimwit, today, I'd slap some sense into my 18 year old self! That guy was retarded!

How many of us weren't at 18...?

 

[lokie]

That seems pretty arbitrary, beans in a jar I mean. Today it wouldn't be anything like that, I'm sure you can appreciate the reality of the situation. Jim Crow laws were based on ignorance/racism.. We know better today.

Hopefully, in your opinion, I'm not missing your point, how would we ensure the same thing doesn't happen today with intelligence instead of race, who decides whose 'competent' enough to cast their vote, but like I said in the OP, I don't have the answer for that, I have ideas, but not positive solutions. But the alternative seems to be harming us more than it's benefiting us, and I have to ask you, do you agree with that statement or not? Do you think allowing 18 year old people to vote is doing more good or more bad for the country as a whole, based solely on their level of intelligence and grasp on the current issues that most of America care about?

I just think of myself at 18, which is really all any of us have, personal experiences, and how many times have you guys seen me preach about how useless personal experiences are in regards to scientific findings..? At 18, I was a fucking dimwit, today, I'd slap some sense into my 18 year old self! That guy was retarded!

How many of us weren't at 18...?

alas this has not been overcome.

 

[abandonconflict]

Political scientists get the same voting rights as inbred mongoloids.

Your real power to democratically change society is in how you spend. Disagree with killing dolphins? Don't buy Chicken of the Sea. Disagree with GMO food? Starve. Disagree with climate change? Drive an electric car, or walk. Vote with your money. Clearly we choose the evil corporations that rule our lives.

 

[Doer]

So true. Those that say they really like us Merkins but we are ruled by evil govt. Too funny, they are ruled by their govt. We rule ourselves.

Information, opinion, lies and brainwash in the USA are the way to get to that only. Self rule. We make the bed, we get lied to, then we lie in the bed. And then we spread the lies we perfer. It's not democracy and is not suppose to be.

We try to pay better attention. We need to. The News-Lobby-Advertizing-Recreation Complex lies to us every day, in every way. Why can't we talk about the waste? That is the so called 3rd rail, actually.

Entitlement spending is the way to lock the waste in and not talk about it. We waste 1/3. The dirty secret is that the waste takes the place of blood vendetta. Waste is slightly more slippery than blood for smoothing the wheels of self rule. That's it to me.

If we are going to waste it, why not waste OPM? Other people's money. China, for example?

 

[deprave]

I have to vote no on this obviously because of corruption but I do feel that people shouldn't be allowed to vote for Democrats or Republicans any longer lol

I think thats a good test, if you vote for either of these parties you should be deemed a chicken shit or a moron and then your vote shouldn't count.

 

[abandonconflict]

So true. Those that say they really like us Merkins but we are ruled by evil govt. Too funny, they are ruled by their govt. We rule ourselves.

Information, opinion, lies and brainwash in the USA are the way to get to that only. Self rule. We make the bed, we get lied to, then we lie in the bed. And then we spread the lies we perfer. It's not democracy and is not suppose to be.

We try to pay better attention. We need to. The News-Lobby-Advertizing-Recreation Complex lies to us every day, in every way. Why can't we talk about the waste? That is the so called 3rd rail, actually.

Entitlement spending is the way to lock the waste in and not talk about it. We waste 1/3. The dirty secret is that the waste takes the place of blood vendetta. Waste is slightly more slippery than blood for smoothing the wheels of self rule. That's it to me.

If we are going to waste it, why not waste OPM? Other people's money. China, for example?

"Entitlement spending" which is a harsh description of social welfare, has benefits you must be ignoring if you feel it is wasteful. For one, domestic spending is not nearly as wasteful as military spending, for that money stays within US borders and flows upward, stimulating aggregate demand. Foodstamps create jobs and feed poor Americans and ultimately end back up in the pockets of the upper economic echelons. Military spending can only do this in the form of soldiers paychecks supporting entire cities, so long as half the soldiers stationed nearby are not deployed.

 

[beenthere]

"Entitlement spending" which is a harsh description of social welfare, has benefits you must be ignoring if you feel it is wasteful. For one, domestic spending is not nearly as wasteful as military spending, for that money stays within US borders and flows upward, stimulating aggregate demand. Foodstamps create jobs and feed poor Americans and ultimately end back up in the pockets of the upper economic echelons. Military spending can only do this in the form of soldiers paychecks supporting entire cities, so long as half the soldiers stationed nearby are not deployed.

I'd like to know how money taken out of the economy only to be re-injected would be considered stimulating?

 

[abandonconflict]

I'd like to know how money taken out of the economy only to be re-injected would be considered stimulating?

Obama is redistributing, madbro?

Of course not, you're a 14 year old living with mom and dad and you've never grown cannabis. This is a cannabis growing site by the way.

 

[Doer]

"Entitlement spending" which is a harsh description of social welfare, has benefits you must be ignoring if you feel it is wasteful. For one, domestic spending is not nearly as wasteful as military spending, for that money stays within US borders and flows upward, stimulating aggregate demand. Foodstamps create jobs and feed poor Americans and ultimately end back up in the pockets of the upper economic echelons. Military spending can only do this in the form of soldiers paychecks supporting entire cities, so long as half the soldiers stationed nearby are not deployed.

No you missed the point with the partisan squabble. All is waste. And that is exactly what they want. Which waste is best? My waste is better than yours.

Entitlement spending is not harsh code for something. It IS what it is. You think Entitlement is Partisan. But, we spend on a multitude of Entitlement. 1/2 the budget or more (if we had a budget)

Everything you list and much more is set in the budget. There are those that are Entitled to it. You argue even when I agree. It is just that to a Partisan, argument. Everything is partisan.

If Obama wins again. Good for him. That is self rule. I will be fine and I will support the President as I do now.

But, if Mitt wins you will be shitting your pants in dismay. That is the difference, plan and simple. You take sides. I do not. It's the waste, stupids. Not the Economy, not the Entitlement spending. With Foreign and Domestic policy the most important issues are the ones they won't discuss on either side of the isle.

 

[Doer]

Obama is redistributing, madbro?

Of course not, you're a 14 year old living with mom and dad and you've never grown cannabis. This is a cannabis growing site by the way.

He is in re-disto right now. He's for it. You have said you are for it. And so slimy in forum. Mr. Put Down. Just ignore it.

And if this guy is 14, he is much smarter than you.

 

[Doer]

I'd like to know how money taken out of the economy only to be re-injected would be considered stimulating?

Hey, good point. Just lay off the rhetorical questions with these ass-holes, is my advice. They are not worthy. They are not up to the level of polite debate. Hiding little cowards, of put down.

So, very correct if you just point out, that is not "stimulus." That went to make the Union pension Ponzi schemes whole. Now the next round of payola is planned for the re-election. It's all lies on lies, and lies about lies. You can ignore the partisan. I do.

 

[Harrekin]

Fucking facists...

 

[NoDrama]

Given, your vote doesn't really count anyway. Vote for whomever you want, nothing will change. There is no single person who can turn this around, no magical leader who can stop the immutable laws of mathematics. He/she doesn't exist.

 

[abandonconflict]

No you missed the point with the partisan squabble. All is waste. And that is exactly what they want. Which waste is best? My waste is better than yours.

Entitlement spending is not harsh code for something. It IS what it is. You think Entitlement is Partisan. But, we spend on a multitude of Entitlement. 1/2 the budget or more (if we had a budget)

Everything you list and much more is set in the budget. There are those that are Entitled to it. You argue even when I agree. It is just that to a Partisan, argument. Everything is partisan.

If Obama wins again. Good for him. That is self rule. I will be fine and I will support the President as I do now.

But, if Mitt wins you will be shitting your pants in dismay. That is the difference, plan and simple. You take sides. I do not. It's the waste, stupids. Not the Economy, not the Entitlement spending. With Foreign and Domestic policy the most important issues the ones they won't discuss on either side of the isle.

Yeah, let them eat cake.