People are always complaining about people that can vote but do not......I take another position. I thing it is completely irresponsible to vote unless you have some awareness of the issues and where candidates stand......
Voting for the sake of voting is totally irresponsible........
It all boils down to being an INFORMED voter...
2007-04-12 01:37:11 · 14 answers · asked by Dave K 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
It would be nice but unconstitutional. You would hope that by the age of 18 people would naturally be informed and able to be responsable...but you'd be wrong. I agree with you but it will never happen.
2007-04-12 06:30:14 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think people should have a certain amount of intelligence before they are aloud to vote. A large percentage of people who vote choose the candidate that they heard of, like a last names basis. They do not know what the people stand for. I think people should know what and who they are voting for.
2007-04-12 01:46:50 · answer #2 · answered by Lauren C 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I totally agree. Unfortunately, it will be seen as racist, ageist, sexist, and any other ist you can think of.
Not everybody is afforded the ability to gather information and make an informed vote....blah, blah, blah....
So as long as you can show Id, make some sort of mark(signature), and you know the symbols (elephant, mule, pot leaf) of the party you think you like, (cause he is so handsome, white, black, female etc..) you may vote to change policy that affects my family.
Just remember, that in theory Communism is perfect....in theory, so is Capitalis...err...I mean Democracy.
2007-04-12 01:47:01 · answer #3 · answered by SGT T 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's the excuse they used to prevent backs from voting the same they tried to prevent women from voting
So they came up with the college electoral vote so they now can ignore any ones vote including YOURS....
2007-04-12 03:29:28 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That would be unconstitutional even though there were laws in the past to prevent certain groups from having the right to vote.
2007-04-12 01:44:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I agree with you but it's a right I would fight for anyone to have. I also think there should be a test for people to take before becoming parents!
2007-04-12 08:35:33 · answer #6 · answered by Ktcyan 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That sounds like another charade that was enacted in the south many years ago. it was called the POLL TAX, and it was designed to weed out poor people, basically black people. Who do you guess your proposal would affect most?
2007-04-12 08:59:52 · answer #7 · answered by lakementalhealth 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I totally agree with you. I also think Presidential candidates should have to pass lie detector and psychological tests.
2007-04-12 03:10:49 · answer #8 · answered by Big Bear 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The U.S tried that at one point... and "tests" were fixed to discriminate against black voters. There's nothing that would stop that kind of corruption today - not necessarily against blacks, but any group.
2007-04-12 01:44:44 · answer #9 · answered by steddy voter 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I guess it depends on what you call being informed.
Some people get 'informed' by ideologues and people with agendas that are far from american, but who wrap themselves in the flag.
2007-04-12 01:40:13 · answer #10 · answered by Joe M 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋