Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: zahc on March 19, 2015, 07:32:34 PM
-
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/19/politics/obama-mandatory-voting/
"The people who tend not to vote are young, they're lower income, they're skewed more heavily towards immigrant groups and minority groups," Obama said. "There's a reason why some folks try to keep them away from the polls."
discuss.
-
An obvious ploy to hike up the progressive vote.
It won't happen.
I don't approve of it.
There IS one circumstance I would approve of it. Just one:
That concurrent with the introduction of this law (which would really have to be an amendment to the Constitution) there would, on every ballot in every election, under every choice for public office, be added the following choice:
□ NONE OF THE ABOVE.
--And, that none of the contenders for the office where "none" won could ever run for any public office, anywhere.
[tinfoil]
But we all know THAT ain't about to happen! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
-
I'm all for it as long as voting day is moved to the day after tax day.
-
Make it write in only, not multiple choice.
-
Require a quiz before voting, with the voter having to know who the VP, senate majority leader, house speaker, and various cabinet members are.
-
Three words:
Low. Information. Voters.
-
"The people who tend not to vote are young, they're lower income, they're skewed more heavily towards immigrant groups and minority groups," Obama said. "There's a reason why some folks try to keep them away from the polls."
That quote defines people who don't pay attention to politics and are less likely to make an educated vote.
-
Three words:
Low. Information. Voters.
By and large that defines who is currently voting.
Making voting mandatory will bring in a slew of voters who are even at a lower tier.
-
He's talking about the illegal immigrant voters.
-
Require a quiz before voting, with the voter having to know who the VP, senate majority leader, house speaker, and various cabinet members are.
^this
Along with if your tax liability is zero or you get a refund because your a welfare critter....you cannot vote.
-
Require a quiz before voting, with the voter having to know who the VP, senate majority leader, house speaker, and various cabinet members are.
I bet the political landscape would drastically change if you required a quiz as simple as matching any presidential candidate with their VP running mate. I bet that would eliminate 75% of low information voters.
-
^this
Along with if your tax liability is zero or you get a refund because your a welfare critter....you cannot vote.
Excuse me? I don't think I appreciate that.
There's tons of people who don't pay direct income taxes but are good citizens just like yourself.
-
Require a quiz before voting, with the voter having to know who the VP, senate majority leader, house speaker, and various cabinet members are.
Sounds a lot like the old Jim Crow laws on voting.
-
I'm all for it as long as voting day is moved to the day after tax day.
Nope. Same Day. You pay all (Property, Local, State, and Federal) Taxes. To each taxing body. They each have a rep right there in a long line of tables. You write a check to the School District, County Board, City Board, Pension Fund, State and Feds. Did I mention, there's no, zero, zip, nada withholding? Right there, in full. No EITC or other refundable tax credits. (We'd obviously have to have a flat tax), then and only then are you handed a ballot and sent into the voting booth.
I bet we'd have balanced budgets and no debt at every level.
-
Sounds a lot like the old Jim Crow laws on voting.
It actually sounds nothing like them at all.
-
It actually sounds nothing like them at all.
Taking a test and having to pass before you can vote? That was part of the Jim Crow voting laws.
-
Nope. Same Day. You pay all (Property, Local, State, and Federal) Taxes. To each taxing body. They each have a rep right there in a long line of tables. You write a check to the School District, County Board, City Board, Pension Fund, State and Feds. Did I mention, there's no, zero, zip, nada withholding? Right there, in full. No EITC or other refundable tax credits. (We'd obviously have to have a flat tax), then and only then are you handed a ballot and sent into the voting booth.
I bet we'd have balanced budgets and no debt at every level.
As we've often discussed in the past, I'm right there with you, but was too lazy to write it all out again. :laugh:
-
Taking a test and having to pass before you can vote? That was part of the Jim Crow voting laws.
Oh. It must be the same, then. You sure told me.
-
Oh. It must be the same, then. You sure told me.
Sounds like is different that is the same. Were you born an punk or did you acquire that skillset?
-
Sounds like is different that is the same. Were you born an punk or did you acquire that skillset?
I thought personal attacks (like calling people punks) were against the rules.
Equating people with white supremacists, however, is not forbidden. So you're OK, there.
-
It's really impossible to come up with a reasonable voting cutoff.
If there is voting, everyone should be doing it, or as close to everyone as feasible.
Certainly I think that voting standards in the US are already too restrictive.
-
It's really impossible to come up with a reasonable voting cutoff.
If there is voting, everyone should be doing it, or as close to everyone as feasible.
Certainly I think that voting standards in the US are already too restrictive.
Can you describe, briefly, your ideal voting scheme?
I would say every adult who cares enough to make it to the polls on their own steam should vote. I think they only things I'd change would be restore voting rights to former felons (after they serve stiff sentences, for actual crimes); and at the cultural level, we'd stop encouraging every Tom, Dick, and Harry to vote.
And obviously, voter registration would involve the issuance of free photo ID, if the voter has nothing else. No political entity would be barred from requiring photo ID for their elections.
-
My ideal voting scheme ?
Ignoring total pie-in-the sky scenarios that I do for sci-fi writing:
I would make it legal for every citizen of the country that is not mentally demented, and who is at least 16 years old (I don't know any precedent of younger people than this being allowed to vote), to be able to vote either in person or by absentee ballot. I would also make it legal for the same people to get elected for as many offices as practicable, and make as many offices directly electable, as is practicable.
Israel allows prison inmates to vote (and in one case even let a prison inmate run, though not for an Israeli office), but that is not practicable in the US because the US voting system is based on precincts and districts.
-
I would also make it legal for the same people to get elected for as many offices as practicable, and make as many offices directly electable, as is practicable.
I would go the other way, by repealing Amendment 17, and leaving the electoral college in place.
-
Too many folks with no skin in the game already vote. No need to increase the ability of the FSA to get gov't agents to do their dirty work and steal form the productive.
Nope. Same Day. You pay all (Property, Local, State, and Federal) Taxes. To each taxing body. They each have a rep right there in a long line of tables. You write a check to the School District, County Board, City Board, Pension Fund, State and Feds. Did I mention, there's no, zero, zip, nada withholding? Right there, in full. No EITC or other refundable tax credits. (We'd obviously have to have a flat tax), then and only then are you handed a ballot and sent into the voting booth.
I bet we'd have balanced budgets and no debt at every level.
Sounds reasonable.
-
. . .
There IS one circumstance I would approve of it. Just one:
That concurrent with the introduction of this law (which would really have to be an amendment to the Constitution) there would, on every ballot in every election, under every choice for public office, be added the following choice:
□ NONE OF THE ABOVE.
--And, that none of the contenders for the office where "none" won could ever run for any public office, anywhere.
. . .
How about "None of the Above" being automatically entered as the choice of registered voters who don't actually show up to vote? With the major parties (rather than the taxpayers) having to pay for the next election as their penalty for failing to put forth candidates worth voting for?
-
What is it with Obama always thinking he can force people to do stuff?
-
Liz, I , and a few others had an epic argument with some libtard about this issue the other day. it devolved fairly quickly.
The tolerant leftist quickly retreated to "you people can't be reasoned with" and "you would criticize obama EVEN IF HE gave you a million dollars from the treasury!"
To which i snarkily replied "Well yes, because in addition to being fiscally irresponsible, that would not be a constitutional use of his power as president"
-
Didn't the courts rule on those poll taxes and tests?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
-
Didn't the courts rule on those poll taxes and tests?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
But the Republicans have an awful new test! They want people to prove they have a face!
-
I would make it legal for every citizen of the country that is not mentally demented, and who is at least 16 years old (I don't know any precedent of younger people than this being allowed to vote)
Why 16? The immature already have the vote. The only reason I agree with the age being 18 is it's the age we consider people "of age" and suitable for compulsory military service.
-
Why 16? The immature already have the vote. The only reason I agree with the age being 18 is it's the age we consider people "of age" and suitable for compulsory military service.
Yeah, pretty much. 18 is generally considered legal adult-hood. Drinking and CCW ages in some states notwithstanding.
-
Liz, I , and a few others had an epic argument with some libtard about this issue the other day. it devolved fairly quickly.
The tolerant leftist quickly retreated to "you people can't be reasoned with" and "you would criticize obama EVEN IF HE gave you a million dollars from the treasury!"
To which i snarkily replied "Well yes, because in addition to being fiscally irresponsible, that would not be a constitutional use of his power as president"
I'm not sure that actually became epic until the idiot with more picitinny than sense showed up, but yeah, fighting with that moron was certainly an eye opener, which really isn't helpful when it's one in the morning and you actually need to be sleeping.
It didn't devolve into "you people can't be reasoned with11!1!1"
It started there.
Here's Fitz, innocently mocking our President, and me, throwing him an assist, when along comes irate liberal troll, out for blood.
Ultimately, the idiot in question "admitted" that it would be unconstitutional, but was still mad at us for criticizing our Great and Wonderful Oz for even bringing it up because "it was a good idea to at least think about for improving our country" or some rot like that.
I still don't think he actually understood why it was in direct conflict with the first amendment.
I'm still slightly steamed that an American President and someone who is supposedly a Constitutional Scholar dismissed the idea, not on a fundamental philosophical level (because, correct me if I'm wrong, but you know, free speech, pretty basic building block of our whole country, right?) but because of the impractically of legally implementing it.