I need answers both left and right to engage (Page 8): Loki, it sounds as if, you think that there is an elite aristocracy that should determine the rules that govern the hoi polloi.

acknowledgeurma

Loki wrote:

"Equal voting power?" Initially, voting ... (show quote)

Loki, it sounds as if, you think that there is an elite aristocracy that should determine the rules that govern the hoi polloi. Do you agree with the idea "to only allow people who [have] something to lose the vote"?

Loki Loc: Georgia

acknowledgeurma wrote:

Loki, it sounds as if, you think that there is an elite aristocracy that should determine the rules that govern the hoi polloi. Do you agree with the idea "to only allow people who [have] something to lose the vote"?

The politicians everyone loves to bitch about did not elect themselves. If you call having a working knowledge of YOUR government being an "elite," then yes. People are voting who literally have no idea what or who they are voting for. I personally have talked to people who were going to vote a straight Republican (or Democrat) ticket who literally had no idea who was running for what office, who their Senators were, who their Representatives were, who the Vice-President was, whether or not they were Democrat or Republican or Independent or Libertarian or anything else, who voted which way on what issue. There are people who cannot read voting. How do they know who or what they are voting for? I am saying that initially, only people who had something to lose could vote. I am NOT saying that only property owning white males should be allowed to vote. I AM saying that voting qualifications should be a little more comprehensive than being able to fog a mirror. Other than military personnel, I don't think 18 year olds should be allowed to vote. They can't buy booze, but they can vote for who makes the laws? Many, perhaps most 18 year olds do not have fully developed brains yet. They have no life experience, no real conception of the real world, and frequently make bad decisions.
Our government is in a complete mess right now, and the politicians who screwed it up did not vote themselves into office, nor did they re-elect themselves. You will never go broke betting on the ignorance and apathy of the average voter. You would not consider letting someone who is totally unqualified build your house, but you let them build your government?
Yes, I believe that voting should be restricted to an elite aristocracy. You can become a member of this aristocracy by caring enough to spend just a few days educating yourself on the government that impacts your and my life. You don't have to agree with me, but you should be informed enough to know enough about the issues and candidates to cast an intelligent vote.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Loki wrote:

The politicians everyone loves to bitch about did not elect themselves. If you call having a working knowledge of YOUR government being an "elite," then yes. People are voting who literally have no idea what or who they are voting for. I personally have talked to people who were going to vote a straight Republican (or Democrat) ticket who literally had no idea who was running for what office, who their Senators were, who their Representatives were, who the Vice-President was, whether or not they were Democrat or Republican or Independent or Libertarian or anything else, who voted which way on what issue. There are people who cannot read voting. How do they know who or what they are voting for? I am saying that initially, only people who had something to lose could vote. I am NOT saying that only property owning white males should be allowed to vote. I AM saying that voting qualifications should be a little more comprehensive than being able to fog a mirror. Other than military personnel, I don't think 18 year olds should be allowed to vote. They can't buy booze, but they can vote for who makes the laws? Many, perhaps most 18 year olds do not have fully developed brains yet. They have no life experience, no real conception of the real world, and frequently make bad decisions.
Our government is in a complete mess right now, and the politicians who screwed it up did not vote themselves into office, nor did they re-elect themselves. You will never go broke betting on the ignorance and apathy of the average voter. You would not consider letting someone who is totally unqualified build your house, but you let them build your government?
Yes, I believe that voting should be restricted to an elite aristocracy. You can become a member of this aristocracy by caring enough to spend just a few days educating yourself on the government that impacts your and my life. You don't have to agree with me, but you should be informed enough to know enough about the issues and candidates to cast an intelligent vote.

The politicians everyone loves to bitch about did ... (show quote)

"Yes, I believe that voting should be restricted to an elite aristocracy. You can become a member of this aristocracy by caring enough to spend just a few days educating yourself on the government that impacts your and my life. You don't have to agree with me, but you should be informed enough to know enough about the issues and candidates to cast an intelligent vote."
Yep;
At least we can dream.

acknowledgeurma

eagleye13 wrote:

"Yes, I believe that voting should be restricted to an elite aristocracy. You can become a member of this aristocracy by caring enough to spend just a few days educating yourself on the government that impacts your and my life. You don't have to agree with me, but you should be informed enough to know enough about the issues and candidates to cast C."
Yep;
At least we can dream.

So who determines what "informed enough to know enough about the issues and candidates" is? Who determines what "informed enough to know enough about the issues and candidates" is?

acknowledgeurma

Loki wrote:

The politicians everyone loves to bitch about did not elect themselves. If you call having a working knowledge of YOUR government being an "elite," then yes. People are voting who literally have no idea what or who they are voting for. I personally have talked to people who were going to vote a straight Republican (or Democrat) ticket who literally had no idea who was running for what office, who their Senators were, who their Representatives were, who the Vice-President was, whether or not they were Democrat or Republican or Independent or Libertarian or anything else, who voted which way on what issue. There are people who cannot read voting. How do they know who or what they are voting for? I am saying that initially, only people who had something to lose could vote. I am NOT saying that only property owning white males should be allowed to vote. I AM saying that voting qualifications should be a little more comprehensive than being able to fog a mirror. Other than military personnel, I don't think 18 year olds should be allowed to vote. They can't buy booze, but they can vote for who makes the laws? Many, perhaps most 18 year olds do not have fully developed brains yet. They have no life experience, no real conception of the real world, and frequently make bad decisions.
Our government is in a complete mess right now, and the politicians who screwed it up did not vote themselves into office, nor did they re-elect themselves. You will never go broke betting on the ignorance and apathy of the average voter. You would not consider letting someone who is totally unqualified build your house, but you let them build your government?
Yes, I believe that voting should be restricted to an elite aristocracy. You can become a member of this aristocracy by caring enough to spend just a few days educating yourself on the government that impacts your and my life. You don't have to agree with me, but you should be informed enough to know enough about the issues and candidates to cast an intelligent vote.

The politicians everyone loves to bitch about did ... (show quote)

Loki wrote, "...the politicians who screwed it up did not vote themselves into office, nor did they re-elect themselves."

In Texas and I imagine a few other states, the politicians pretty much choose their voters, what with gerrymandering and all.

Loki Loc: Georgia

acknowledgeurma wrote:

So who determines what "informed enough to know enough about the issues and candidates" is? Who determines what "informed enough to know enough about the issues and candidates" is?

How about a simple questionnaire?

Who is your state representative?
Who is your state senator?
Who is your US representative?
Who are your US senators?
Can you name one important issue that these elected officials voted on in the past six months, and how did they vote?
Can you name the president and vice-president?
Can you read these questions yourself, without a translator?
You would be surprised at how many people show up at the polls who cannot meet these simple criteria that used to be common knowledge for a tenth grade Civics student.

Loki Loc: Georgia

acknowledgeurma wrote:

Loki wrote, "...the politicians who screwed it up did not vote themselves into office, nor did they re-elect themselves."

In Texas and I imagine a few other states, the politicians pretty much choose their voters, what with gerrymandering and all.

Gerrymandering works both ways. It was invented by Eldridge Gerry, a Massachusetts Democrat. It has been used far more by Democrats than by Republicans.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Loki wrote:

Gerrymandering works both ways. It was invented by Eldridge Gerry, a Massachusetts Democrat. It has been used far more by Democrats than by Republicans.

"Gerrymandering works both ways. It was invented by Eldridge Gerry, a Massachusetts Democrat. It has been used far more by Democrats than by Republicans."
I tink acknowledgeurma will have a problem with this.

acknowledgeurma

eagleye13 wrote:

"Gerrymandering works both ways. It was invented by Eldridge Gerry, a Massachusetts Democrat. It has been used far more by Democrats than by Republicans."
I tink acknowledgeurma will have a problem with this.

What will I have a problem with, that gerrymandering has been used far more by Democrats than by Republicans? I could ask where you got the data to support "far more", but whatever party does it, it is an anti-democratic practice and should not (in my opinion) happen. But then, I'm not even sure first-past-the-post districts promote democracy.

If Democrats have historically used gerrymandering more than Republicans, lately Republicans have developed it into a fine art. See:

http://www.businessinsider.com/partisan-gerrymandering-has-benefited-republicans-more-than-democrats-2017-6

Loki Loc: Georgia

acknowledgeurma wrote:

What will I have a problem with, that gerrymanderi... (show quote)

Republicans now control most state legislatures. They are using gerrymanders the same way the Democrats did when they controlled the majority of state legislatures. Actions have consequences and payback happens.

acknowledgeurma

Loki wrote:

Republicans now control most state legislatures. They are using gerrymanders the same way the Democrats did when they controlled the majority of state legislatures. Actions have consequences and payback happens.

So if Democrats gain control they will be justified in gerrymandering? When does it stop?

Loki Loc: Georgia

acknowledgeurma wrote:

So if Democrats gain control they will be justified in gerrymandering? When does it stop?

It stops when ignorant, apathetic voters are no longer allowed to vote. That means never.

acknowledgeurma

Loki wrote:

It stops when ignorant, apathetic voters are no longer allowed to vote. That means never.

Isn't "apathetic voters" a near oxymoron? I mean, doesn't apathy lead one to not vote? And because only God is alleged to know all, doesn't everyone vote in some degree of ignorance?

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

acknowledgeurma wrote:

Isn't "apathetic voters" a near oxymoron? I mean, doesn't apathy lead one to not vote? And because only God is alleged to know all, doesn't everyone vote in some degree of ignorance?

"Isn't "apathetic voters" a near oxymoron? I mean, doesn't apathy lead one to not vote? And because only God is alleged to know all, doesn't everyone vote in some degree of ignorance?"

Ignorance?
Well there is ignorance,
and then
there is IGNORANCE.

The dumbing down of the electorate has been by design.
Public schooling and a bought MSM has done a good job of that.

Loki Loc: Georgia

acknowledgeurma wrote:

Isn't "apathetic voters" a near oxymoron? I mean, doesn't apathy lead one to not vote? And because only God is alleged to know all, doesn't everyone vote in some degree of ignorance?

By apathetic I mean ignorant voters who don't care enough to correct their ignorance. Some degree of ignorance is one thing. Being unable to answer the simplest questions about the election you are about to vote in is quite another. Being unable to read the ballot, and having absolutely no knowledge of the candidates and the issues should be a disqualifier. You would not allow unqualified people to do work for you, yet you are fine with having them elect your government.