Why should you get a vote? Serious question. Why are you above the knowledge threshold that allows people to vote in your system? So I'll ask more directly: would you be in favour of your proposed system even if it prevented you from voting?
What the fuck?
What is futile and unnecessary? Democracy?
Right, just white male landowners. But that wasn't based on a knowledge test, was it? Was that a matter of trust, or just racism and sexism? If that's the system you want, just say so. Dressing it up as protecting people from their own stupidity doesn't change what it is.
Right, when really it's just white men who own property that know what's best. It's funny, people accuse 'liberals' and 'academics' of elitism all the time, but arguments like this almost always come from white conservative men who want to protect the masses from their own ignorance.
But you should still get to vote. Because you're special.
Yes yes, you've said this many times, but you still have said absolutely nothing to justify such a system. I get that it's your opinion, but your opinion is stupid, impractical, and incredibly open to abuse in this case.Megan Fox . . .I will leave the government assistance portion out and focus my response on an aptitude test. Yes, because I believe in an ideal, I should have everything worked out from the test questions to the minimal foundation of knowledge. To get it started, how about some basic questions such as: Name the 3 branches of government, How many Senators is each state allotted, If the president is killed who takes over that role? That is some pretty rudimentary questions that A LOT OF PEOPLE don't know. So I ask you again, why should they vote on something they know nothing about? Would you cast your vote for best author if you never read a book? SHould your opinion actually be relevant if it has no basis in fact or experience? Answer is no.
I know what you are getting at with the suppression of voting but nobody is claiming only the elite of the elite should vote, just have a RUDIMENTARY understanding of our system, most people don't. If they decided to make a test and I failed, looks like I would study and try again come next election. I am all about personal accountability and expect all people to make informed decision, not vote like they were asked which president they would like to have lunch with.
Yes seriously your royal smugness (I know, fresh coming from me). Would you allow somebody who did not know how to build your house build it and then feel comfortable living under that roof? How is that any different than someone making a decision on who represents our country with no knowledge of the issues? We ARE FORCED TO LIVE in said conditions, no different than you would be forced to live under your roof after it was built.
Well for one, arguing over the internet about America w/ a Canadian (HA). Yes, democracy was exactly what I was getting at, that is unnecessary. It wasn't like I was talking about the future of our country being decided by people that don't even understand our system or what a platform is. Have you not watched late night TV? Who won the first lady debate? And these are the people voting? No fucking thank you.
A typical liberal response. Yes, I want to suppress all people except white males. That isn't alarmist (or typical) at all is it? Jumping to conclusions and then attacking someone's character b/c they believe, like our founding fathers in an educated electorate. This guy says it better than me but I fully agree:
The process proscribed within the Constitution allowed the document to be amended, and without the help of any judicial interpretation. The founding fathers believed, as I do, that the long term welfare of our nation is best served by an informed, invested electorate. Thus, I question the assumption that the original intent fails at all – not only for these reasons, but due to the fact that women were not allowed to vote then because they were not regarded as well enough educated or informed, and that only property owners were thought to have enough of an investment in the long term welfare of the state to qualify as voters.
It isn't about suppressing the women's vote, it was about an ideal. Society evolves and social norms change, that doesn't change the spirit in which the constitution was written. It was about being well informed, not about rich white dudes but since that doesn't help you case, I see why you go on the attack.
You come off as elitists when you pretend to be the protector of humanity. I'm not singling out one single race, color, creed, or gender but YOU ARE which shows EXACTLY what I am talking about. I make a statement that people should be informed and your basic response is, "no they shouldn't you bigoted, woman-hating racist." You are contributing to the problem b/c you enable poor behavior. Yes, taking a responsibility like voting for granted is poor behavior and you fully support it behind the guise of being a humanitarian.
No, I should get to vote because I am informed...
Exactly, somebody doesn't like someone saying people should take their responsibility seriously and you attack it b/c you don't think people should have responsibility. How does it feel to be painted with such broad strokes?
How is it impractical and open to abuse if it is a standardized exam such as the one you take to get your driver's license? People want rights but don't want the responsibility that comes with those rights. You are a prime example of that mentality.