- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 34,817
- Reaction score
- 18,576
- Location
- Look to your right... I'm that guy.
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Is not voting... aka "low voter turnout"... a bad thing?
To hear so many people tell it, you'd think it is. Some have even used words like "disgrace" to describe American low percentages of participation.
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I simply don't see it that way.
Some countries mandate voting. There seems to be an increasing sentiment in this country to do the same, to mandate voting. One of the claims is that people would be more inclined to research if they knew that had to. I don't buy that. I would be vehemently against that, for two reasons...
1) I don't want the results skewed by people who don't care enough to research, or at least pay attention.
2) The freedom to not do something is just as important, if not more so, than the freedom to have the ability to do something.
IMHO, #2 stands quite well on it's own. And I detest "get out the vote" campaigns due to #1.
What say you?
Is not voting... aka "low voter turnout"... a bad thing?
To hear so many people tell it, you'd think it is. Some have even used words like "disgrace" to describe American low percentages of participation.
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I simply don't see it that way.
Some countries mandate voting. There seems to be an increasing sentiment in this country to do the same, to mandate voting. One of the claims is that people would be more inclined to research if they knew that had to. I don't buy that. I would be vehemently against that, for two reasons...
1) I don't want the results skewed by people who don't care enough to research, or at least pay attention.
2) The freedom to not do something is just as important, if not more so, than the freedom to have the ability to do something.
IMHO, #2 stands quite well on it's own. And I detest "get out the vote" campaigns due to #1.
What say you?
Is not voting... aka "low voter turnout"... a bad thing?
To hear so many people tell it, you'd think it is. Some have even used words like "disgrace" to describe American low percentages of participation.
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I simply don't see it that way.
Some countries mandate voting. There seems to be an increasing sentiment in this country to do the same, to mandate voting. One of the claims is that people would be more inclined to research if they knew that had to. I don't buy that. I would be vehemently against that, for two reasons...
1) I don't want the results skewed by people who don't care enough to research, or at least pay attention.
2) The freedom to not do something is just as important, if not more so, than the freedom to have the ability to do something.
IMHO, #2 stands quite well on it's own. And I detest "get out the vote" campaigns due to #1.
What say you?
Actually it would be better if only informed people voted, and I don't mean that in a mandatory way.
Actually it would be better if only informed people voted, and I don't mean that in a mandatory way.
I think it should be mandatory for any US citizen between 18 and 65.
How about the person who has a very successful career, pays a boat load of taxes, but doesn't own a home because it's not practical with all their traveling?Voted "Other".
I think universal suffrage is ridiculous.
I believe that there should be age (older than 18 for most people), education, property ownership (home and or business), and military service requirements to voting.
Not necessarily all of them for everyone, but some mix of the above.
I'm fine with an 18-year-old in the military voting, and I'm okay with a 40-year-old voting even though he may never have been in the military so long as he has a college education and owns his own home, or maybe no college education but owns a home and business, or, you get the idea.
But allowing every idiot with a GED and a FOX News addiction to vote is crazy, as is allowing folks who have been receiving welfare generationally since we became the "Great Society" that we are.
Is not voting... aka "low voter turnout"... a bad thing?
To hear so many people tell it, you'd think it is. Some have even used words like "disgrace" to describe American low percentages of participation.
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I simply don't see it that way.
Some countries mandate voting. There seems to be an increasing sentiment in this country to do the same, to mandate voting. One of the claims is that people would be more inclined to research if they knew that had to. I don't buy that. I would be vehemently against that, for two reasons...
1) I don't want the results skewed by people who don't care enough to research, or at least pay attention.
2) The freedom to not do something is just as important, if not more so, than the freedom to have the ability to do something.
IMHO, #2 stands quite well on it's own. And I detest "get out the vote" campaigns due to #1.
What say you?
Is not voting... aka "low voter turnout"... a bad thing?
To hear so many people tell it, you'd think it is. Some have even used words like "disgrace" to describe American low percentages of participation.
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I simply don't see it that way.
Some countries mandate voting. There seems to be an increasing sentiment in this country to do the same, to mandate voting. One of the claims is that people would be more inclined to research if they knew that had to. I don't buy that. I would be vehemently against that, for two reasons...
1) I don't want the results skewed by people who don't care enough to research, or at least pay attention.
2) The freedom to not do something is just as important, if not more so, than the freedom to have the ability to do something.
IMHO, #2 stands quite well on it's own. And I detest "get out the vote" campaigns due to #1.
What say you?
How about the person who has a very successful career, pays a boat load of taxes, but doesn't own a home because it's not practical with all their traveling?
"None of the above" is emotionally satisfying, but I think it carries with it two huge negative consequences.I chose "other." When "none of the above" is the last line on all voting machines, that will represent real progress.
Yes. Yes, we do.That depends, is this person a Democrat or a Republican?
We all know that's what really matters.
How about the person who has a very successful career, pays a boat load of taxes, but doesn't own a home because it's not practical with all their traveling?
"None of the above" is emotionally satisfying, but I think it carries with it two huge negative consequences.
1) Many people would choose it just to be jerks.
2) Leaving offices vacant would not serve us well, and would magnify the power of those people and/or parties who do get in.
Voted "Other".
I think universal suffrage is ridiculous.
I believe that there should be age (older than 18 for most people), education, property ownership (home and or business), and military service requirements to voting.
Not necessarily all of them for everyone, but some mix of the above.
I'm fine with an 18-year-old in the military voting, and I'm okay with a 40-year-old voting even though he may never have been in the military so long as he has a college education and owns his own home, or maybe no college education but owns a home and business, or, you get the idea.
But allowing every idiot with a GED and a FOX News addiction to vote is crazy, as is allowing folks who have been receiving welfare generationally since we became the "Great Society" that we are.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?