"Can I change my vote?"
-
wrote on 25 Oct 2020, 17:36 last edited by
You misunderstand. My contention is not that you should have a certain level of education but that you are able to show you understand what and who are being voted on. I know lots of folks without a lot of education that are plenty smart and informed.
-
You misunderstand. My contention is not that you should have a certain level of education but that you are able to show you understand what and who are being voted on. I know lots of folks without a lot of education that are plenty smart and informed.
wrote on 25 Oct 2020, 17:41 last edited by@Mik said in "Can I change my vote?":
You misunderstand. My contention is not that you should have a certain level of education but that you are able to show you understand what and who are being voted on. I know lots of folks without a lot of education that are plenty smart and informed.
But how do you do that? My mother does not read or write very well. Do you call every possible voter? Do you go door to door? Do you ask them questions at the poll place?
I agree that it is important for a person to know what they are voting for, but for me, the "right" to vote is even more important and weighs more than that.
(As a side note, it is interesting in less developed countries and areas how they handle voting. Since some people may not be able to read and may have no identification, the candidates are listed by picture or their party picture and your thumb is dipped in a bright permanent ink after you have voted)
-
wrote on 25 Oct 2020, 17:45 last edited by
@Mik said in "Can I change my vote?":
There is a difference between unsuccessful and irresponsible.
Not being able to afford a house doesn't imply irresponsibility. There's lot's of reasons for it.
I don't think I'm quite ready for a discussion by a bunch of educated middle class people bemoaning the fact that the poor are allowed to vote.
-
wrote on 25 Oct 2020, 17:50 last edited by Doctor Phibes
In general, I thought the idea was to encourage more people to vote, not less.
Sorry, fewer.
-
wrote on 25 Oct 2020, 17:59 last edited by
Again, you completely misunderstand. But I suspect that’s willful.
-
wrote on 25 Oct 2020, 18:14 last edited by
If you learned to express yourself more precisely, we wouldn't have this problem.
Use your words.
-
wrote on 25 Oct 2020, 20:20 last edited by
@taiwan_girl said in "Can I change my vote?":
How can that be? How can three highly informed people come to a different result?
Yeah, but Ax is wrong.
-
In general, I thought the idea was to encourage more people to vote, not less.
Sorry, fewer.
wrote on 25 Oct 2020, 20:31 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in "Can I change my vote?":
In general, I thought the idea was to encourage more people to vote, not less.
Sorry, fewer.
No, the idea is to get better informed voters...
-
@Jolly said in "Can I change my vote?":
@Doctor-Phibes said in "Can I change my vote?":
@Aqua-Letifer said in "Can I change my vote?":
Probably the biggest argument for Jolly's anti-mail-in stance.
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=now 7-d&geo=US&q=Is the earth flat#TIMESERIES
I see no reason why people who do not own property, should be allowed to vote on property taxes.
In order for the republic to function, citizens need to be educated to a certain minimal point, they need to have some skin in the game and they need to put forth a certain level of effort to vote.
The argument for property taxes doesn't make sense, since if they're renting it out to others they're just passing the cost along to their tenants, who are indirectly paying the tax.
I also think that excluding unsuccessful people from voting will further disenfranchise them, leading to further divisions, anger, and in the end, violence.
wrote on 26 Oct 2020, 00:40 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in "Can I change my vote?":
@Jolly said in "Can I change my vote?":
@Doctor-Phibes said in "Can I change my vote?":
@Aqua-Letifer said in "Can I change my vote?":
Probably the biggest argument for Jolly's anti-mail-in stance.
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=now 7-d&geo=US&q=Is the earth flat#TIMESERIES
I see no reason why people who do not own property, should be allowed to vote on property taxes.
In order for the republic to function, citizens need to be educated to a certain minimal point, they need to have some skin in the game and they need to put forth a certain level of effort to vote.
The argument for property taxes doesn't make sense, since if they're renting it out to others they're just passing the cost along to their tenants, who are indirectly paying the tax.
I also think that excluding unsuccessful people from voting will further disenfranchise them, leading to further divisions, anger, and in the end, violence.
You're thinking in terms of only urban real estate. Factor in farms and suburbia. People should not be allowed to vote a tax on only some people in the taxing district, while they pay nothing.
-
wrote on 26 Oct 2020, 00:42 last edited by
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.
-
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.
wrote on 26 Oct 2020, 00:50 last edited byI agree everyone, let them all vote
Link to video -
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.
wrote on 26 Oct 2020, 13:27 last edited by@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.
wrote on 26 Oct 2020, 14:56 last edited by@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.
-
wrote on 26 Oct 2020, 16:10 last edited by Mik
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.
-
wrote on 26 Oct 2020, 16:23 last edited by Doctor Phibes
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.
-
wrote on 26 Oct 2020, 16:43 last edited by
I have no problem with taking the money out of it either.
-
wrote on 26 Oct 2020, 18:08 last edited by
@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?
-
wrote on 26 Oct 2020, 18:11 last edited by
/ignore
-
@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.
wrote on 26 Oct 2020, 18:20 last edited by Jolly@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.
-
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.
wrote on 26 Oct 2020, 18:25 last edited by@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.