2006-12-13 23:24:18 · 23 answers · asked by AngryAmerican82 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
It the responsibility of the elections authority to inform the people.
2006-12-21 02:38:42 · answer #1 · answered by King of the Net 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ah, as a former rising star in the Democratic Party, I can honestly say that there is more to this question, and it's answer, than meets the eye. There are people who vote for a candidate based on the color of their signs. There are women who vote based upon sex appeal. Many vote based on a gut instinct that 'their candidate' is the person who they would pick as their friend out of the pack. There are some voters who vote based on issues. Very few of those have much depth perception, or knowledge base, of those issues. Some of the previous answers mention relying on the educational system to correct this. Some answers rely upon candidates/campaigns to effectively inform voters. The question should be why would anyone be against citizens having to qualify to vote through an issue oriented examination? Pass and you are eligible to vote. Fail and you sit the election out. Next election - new test. As far as knowledge based tests go candidates should be required to pass an examination based upon the office they are seeking. If they fail to take the test and publish the results they are automatically disqualified from seeking office during that election cycle. Even re-election.
The only people who would be opposed to such an exam are those who prefer millions of Americans to remain in the dark on issues such as the fact that the Federal Reserve System is a privately held corporation (Owen-Glass Act of 1913) which has and is systematically raping the American people/government financially.
2006-12-14 03:04:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Nope. A election is a popularity contest. The person's opinion is the vote. A good educations system will ensure that a majority of the people vote intelligently, regardless, most uninformed citizens don't vote anyway.
2006-12-13 23:27:11 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
That would be really nice! I always say people need to take a basic economics and government class before being allowed to vote. I can't believe how ignorant some people are about the way an economy works.
For example: Socialized healthcare. The candidate will say "We want healthcare for everyone! No one should be denied basic health care! That would be inhumane! etc, etc, etc." A lot of people hear that and say, Yes, that's a good idea, no one should be without health care. This person doesn't understand that with socialized healthcare the quality of care goes way down and the wait times for procedures such as MRIs and operations go way up.
You would think it would be a duty to educate yourself on the issues before voting for a candidate. I, unfortunately, know so many people who vote for someone because they look nice or they were an ex-celebrity. Sigh...
2006-12-13 23:39:29 · answer #4 · answered by irishharpist 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, it is not at all illegal! As citizens, they have the right to vote. If they are uninformed, they can be informed before they vote! That is what any party campaign is all about!
2006-12-13 23:27:23 · answer #5 · answered by Sami V 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I am not willing to have my taxes raised in order to have classes for those people who don't do one of the following.
1. Don't watch T.V.
2.Don't read the newspapers
3.Don't listen to radio
4.Don't read poster boards
5.Don't see advertising posts standing in their own front yards
6. Don't have enough sense to read the ballots before they mark them.
But in defense of these people, when I was voting this past election I found that there were several things on the ballot I never even heard about. It took me a bit longer to vote because I had to read each one and attempt to decipher the legal jargon. I have a degree in Political Science and let me tell you that a lot of the problem is still confusion over what is really being voted on.
Besides, if you must know, should you wish to stop uninformed people from voting we would have to pay out more in taxes to insure that all the people 'Did' understand by offering informative classes on each and every standing being voted on.
I am not willing to pay more taxes because I'm sick and tired of hearing about my congressmen and woman giving huge bonuses for Christmas to all of the people who work under them when most americans don't even have health insurance.
2006-12-13 23:56:22 · answer #6 · answered by wonderingmom 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hey! If Hillary had her way convicted felons in jail and illegal aliens that cannot even read, write or speak English (thrown in to illustrate that they are uninformed) would be allowed to vote (again to illustrate) for her and her alone.
Judging by the make-up of the incoming congress I believe they currently vote in to great a number.
2006-12-13 23:40:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Mr. angry american, you're question makes me angry. Do you propose that we don't live in a free state. Isn't that what being American is all about...FREEDOM! So to answer your question: NO, all should be able to vote, lets get the word out and educate the masses so there won't be any uninformed voters.
2006-12-13 23:36:51 · answer #8 · answered by jabbergirl 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No.
Who decides what's uninformed? It's an invitation to mischief.
It's immoral not to fulfill one's responsibility to one's fellow citizens to be an informed voter.
But not everything that is immoral is illegal.
2006-12-13 23:54:14 · answer #9 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No I think they should vote...I think someone who admits to not being informed should be hit with a cattle prod for 3 hours. That ought to correct it.
If people would get off their @ss and learn about the issues (since no compaign will ever tell you anything really useful about the issues or exactly where they stand) then we might not have such issues
2006-12-13 23:36:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋