"Can I change my vote?"
-
I just dont think that there should be any further "tests" to be able to vote.
No economic tests (Do you make more than X USD?)
No education test (Did you complete past Grade X in school?)
No civics test (Name at least two people running for President?)Etc.
@taiwan_girl said in "Can I change my vote?":
I just dont think that there should be any further "tests" to be able to vote.
No economic tests (Do you make more than X USD?)
No education test (Did you complete past Grade X in school?)
No civics test (Name at least two people running for President?)Etc.
For a republic to function, the citizens must be educated and have skin in the game. To do otherwise, means an eventual end to the republic.
-
@taiwan_girl said in "Can I change my vote?":
I just dont think that there should be any further "tests" to be able to vote.
No economic tests (Do you make more than X USD?)
No education test (Did you complete past Grade X in school?)
No civics test (Name at least two people running for President?)Etc.
For a republic to function, the citizens must be educated and have skin in the game. To do otherwise, means an eventual end to the republic.
-
I have no problem with a street sweeper. He or she is helping row the boat. It's those who are able to contribute in some way but do not that I object to being able to vote on how my contributions should be used. That and those who do not understand what they are voting for on even a rudimentary level.
-
The head of the multi billion dollar company already has a disproportionately large amount of influence due to the fact that he can pay bribes, sorry, contributions, to the candidates seeking office, and help them ram home, sorry, introduce legislation that is beneficial to his lifestyle.
If you're going to stop the "non-contributors" from voting it might also be an idea to stop a lot of other things. I suspect neither side is particularly keen on the idea of reducing nest-feathering.
I was only joking
-
@Mik said in "Can I change my vote?":
It's those who are able to contribute in some way but do not that I object to being able to vote on how my contributions should be used.
"... those who are able to contribute in some way but do not" -- and who might that be? Donald Trump during the years when he paid zero federal income tax?
That and those who do not understand what they are voting for on even a rudimentary level.
And who might that be? Donald Trump who thought injecting disinfectant into the body would be be a good way to fight SARS-CoV-2?
-
@Jolly Everybody has skin in the game, whether you are the lowest economic person sweeping the streets with a broom for a dollar a day, or you are the head of a multi billion dollar company.
@taiwan_girl said in "Can I change my vote?":
@Jolly Everybody has skin in the game, whether you are the lowest economic person sweeping the streets with a broom for a dollar a day, or you are the head of a multi billion dollar company.
If a person is not working and/or paying taxes, they have no skin in the game.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
The head of the multi billion dollar company already has a disproportionately large amount of influence due to the fact that he can pay bribes, sorry, contributions, to the candidates seeking office, and help them ram home, sorry, introduce legislation that is beneficial to his lifestyle.
If you're going to stop the "non-contributors" from voting it might also be an idea to stop a lot of other things. I suspect neither side is particularly keen on the idea of reducing nest-feathering.
@Doctor-Phibes said in "Can I change my vote?":
The head of the multi billion dollar company already has a disproportionately large amount of influence due to the fact that he can pay bribes, sorry, contributions, to the candidates seeking office, and help them ram home, sorry, introduce legislation that is beneficial to his lifestyle.
If you're going to stop the "non-contributors" from voting it might also be an idea to stop a lot of other things. I suspect neither side is particularly keen on the idea of reducing nest-feathering.
Money is speech. If you want to limit what an individual can give, just understand how you are limiting speech. Or if the public wishes to put a ceiling on total contributions, I understand that, too.
But if you aren't helping to push the wagon in some manner, I see no reason to give you the franchise.
-
@taiwan_girl said in "Can I change my vote?":
@Jolly Everybody has skin in the game, whether you are the lowest economic person sweeping the streets with a broom for a dollar a day, or you are the head of a multi billion dollar company.
If a person is not working and/or paying taxes, they have no skin in the game.
@Jolly said in "Can I change my vote?":
@taiwan_girl said in "Can I change my vote?":
@Jolly Everybody has skin in the game, whether you are the lowest economic person sweeping the streets with a broom for a dollar a day, or you are the head of a multi billion dollar company.
If a person is not working and/or paying taxes, they have no skin in the game.
More specifically, they have your skin.
-
I don't agree that money is speech. Talk is cheap, after all (rim shot)
I realise from a legal perspective it's been interpreted this way, however I don't agree with this interpretation. I also don't agree that corporations are people.
The idea that somebody's argument should somehow be better after they've given some politician 100 million dollars is flat out wrong, even if it's legally so.
Just because the SCOTUS says something is so doesn't mean it's the upper-case Truth, even if it's the lower-case truth.
-
If corporations were people, I think we all know what kind of people they'd be.
Somebody online said "I refuse to believe that corporations are people until Texas executes one"
-
@Mik said in "Can I change my vote?":
It's those who are able to contribute in some way but do not that I object to being able to vote on how my contributions should be used.
"... those who are able to contribute in some way but do not" -- and who might that be? Donald Trump during the years when he paid zero federal income tax?
That and those who do not understand what they are voting for on even a rudimentary level.
And who might that be? Donald Trump who thought injecting disinfectant into the body would be be a good way to fight SARS-CoV-2?
@Axtremus said in "Can I change my vote?":
@Mik said in "Can I change my vote?":
It's those who are able to contribute in some way but do not that I object to being able to vote on how my contributions should be used.
"... those who are able to contribute in some way but do not" -- and who might that be? Donald Trump during the years when he paid zero federal income tax?
That and those who do not understand what they are voting for on even a rudimentary level.
And who might that be? Donald Trump who thought injecting disinfectant into the body would be be a good way to fight SARS-CoV-2?
You truly are as stupid as you seem.
-
So were we ever able to figure out how many people asked this question from each state? My guess would be over 30K from Wisconsin, 10K from Georgia, etc...
