Who should and should not be allowed to vote?
-
@george-k said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
@jolly said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
Must serve 12 months (or pick your duration) in the military (Army, Marines, Navy, Coast Guard, Air Force) to vote.
What about other forms of public service?
I'm open to suggestions.
@jolly said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
@george-k said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
@jolly said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
Must serve 12 months (or pick your duration) in the military (Army, Marines, Navy, Coast Guard, Air Force) to vote.
What about other forms of public service?
I'm open to suggestions.
Making license plates?
-
Voting privilege based on necessary general knowledge of a competent citizen.
I've given thought to this. The setup could be something like a test of eight randomly selected questions that appears immediately before the ballot. Your ballot would not appear until you completed the test. There could be 60 questions in the total available pool, with eight in each test, so there's no way to cheat or pass along the questions to your buddy behind you.
If you fail, the ballot does not appear. Instead there would be a message of information about what you could do to improve your score the next time.
The questions should be very simple. Name the three branches. Who is president right now. Which state is Los Angeles in. Name one Supreme Court justice. When was independence declared. Like that. You shouldn't have to be a genius, but you do have to know which planet you're on.
The felons who can vote law should be changed. Felons of a certain stripe, no, but other classes, yes. Especially in this day and age, when many so-called felons are prohibited from voting for the rest of their lives unfairly.
-
@catseye3 said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
Voting privilege based on necessary general knowledge of a competent citizen.
I've given thought to this. The setup could be something like a test of eight randomly selected questions that appears immediately before the ballot. Your ballot would not appear until you completed the test. There could be 60 questions in the total available pool, with eight in each test, so there's no way to cheat or pass along the questions to your buddy behind you.
If you fail, the ballot does not appear. Instead there would be a message of information about what you could do to improve your score the next time.
The questions should be very simple. Name the three branches. Who is president right now. Which state is Los Angeles in. Name one Supreme Court justice. When was independence declared. Like that. You shouldn't have to be a genius, but you do have to know which planet you're on.I could vote for that.
-
Support for anything related to intelligence as a qualifier to vote might wane, as soon as the left successfully portrayed such support as racist. Which would occur in 4 seconds.
@horace said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
Support for anything related to intelligence as a qualifier to vote might wane, as soon as the left successfully portrayed such support as racist. Which would occur in 4 seconds.
No, it wouldn't. I thought of that. The randomness of the presentation of the tests would preclude that -- no way to know the race of the next voter in line. You get what you get.
And it iwould specifically not be related to intelligence, but rather to the most basic of elementary knowledge that virtually everyone would have been exposed to in school.
-
@horace said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
Support for anything related to intelligence as a qualifier to vote might wane, as soon as the left successfully portrayed such support as racist. Which would occur in 4 seconds.
No, it wouldn't. I thought of that. The randomness of the presentation of the tests would preclude that -- no way to know the race of the next voter in line. You get what you get.
And it iwould specifically not be related to intelligence, but rather to the most basic of elementary knowledge that virtually everyone would have been exposed to in school.
@catseye3 said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
@horace said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
Support for anything related to intelligence as a qualifier to vote might wane, as soon as the left successfully portrayed such support as racist. Which would occur in 4 seconds.
No, it wouldn't. I thought of that.
well, I stand corrected. You thought of that. You brought to bear your own considerable intelligence, and concluded that basic knowledge tests have nothing to do with intelligence, and that further, there would be no disparities between ethnic groups in their pass/fail rate. Therefore, no charge of racism would ever be applied. Thank you for sharing your insights.
-
@catseye3 said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
@horace said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
Support for anything related to intelligence as a qualifier to vote might wane, as soon as the left successfully portrayed such support as racist. Which would occur in 4 seconds.
No, it wouldn't. I thought of that.
well, I stand corrected. You thought of that. You brought to bear your own considerable intelligence, and concluded that basic knowledge tests have nothing to do with intelligence, and that further, there would be no disparities between ethnic groups in their pass/fail rate. Therefore, no charge of racism would ever be applied. Thank you for sharing your insights.
@horace said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
You brought to bear your own considerable intelligence, and concluded that basic knowledge tests have nothing to do with intelligence,
I didn't quite say that. It takes intelligence to know about voting and how to find your way to the voting precinct, after all.
Simple disagreement is sufficient, Horace. No need to leap immediately to the snark.
-
@horace said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
You brought to bear your own considerable intelligence, and concluded that basic knowledge tests have nothing to do with intelligence,
I didn't quite say that. It takes intelligence to know about voting and how to find your way to the voting precinct, after all.
Simple disagreement is sufficient, Horace. No need to leap immediately to the snark.
@catseye3 said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
@horace said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
You brought to bear your own considerable intelligence, and concluded that basic knowledge tests have nothing to do with intelligence,
I didn't quite say that. It takes intelligence to know about voting and how to find your way to the voting precinct, after all.
Or to procure ID, thus my point in opposition to yours. Though 'intelligence' is too specific for my point. Any requirement that correlates with any personal resource which might differ across groups is sufficient to allow for charges of racism.
Simple disagreement is sufficient, Horace. No need to leap immediately to the snark.
I agree, Cats. I think TNCR is in the throes of an immaturity crisis, and I am trying my best to change that.
-
I would prefer a test that shows that you have some understanding of the issues and candidates on the ballot itself.
@mik said in Who should and should not be allowed to vote?:
that you have some understanding of the issues and candidates on the ballot itself
There’s a letter next to the name. That’s all I need..
-
Questions such as "Have you ever considered getting a man-bun?" and "Is a spray tan ever a good idea?" might be a bit less controversial. It would certainly weed out a significant bunch of people who, whilst not in and of themselves convicted felons, really ought to be locked up.
And if you want to encourage ethnic diversity, how about "Where are all the white women at?"
Another good one - "Why the hell do we spell colour like that?". A bit of a logistical challenge, which also would encourage people to research international matters.
Also, "Foreign Affairs. Are they a good idea?" could be quite thought-provoking for some.
