2007-09-14 07:14:30 · 11 answers · asked by That Guy Over There 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Personally, I think that decision is up to the individual. I do not vote for many reasons. One reason is what you said, I don't keep up on current events. I hate politics. I don't understand politics. And I don't feel like I should "pretend" to have an opinion on something when it comes to voting time. I served 7 years in the military, and never voted while I was in either. I'm not a pretender, if I don't understand it, I don't care to understand it, and don't have an opinion -as a result - I'm not going to pretend to understand, care and have an opinion in a voting booth.
2007-09-14 07:26:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Funny, but the people who propound exclusionary propositions are NEVER among those who would thereby be excluded, from voting, from driving, or whatever. The "trouble" with democracy is that all votes are equal -- a homeless person's vote can cancel out that of a bank president. Tough nails! Any scheme that would make one person's vote worth more than another's is antidemocratic, and we already have enough of that. For example, a vote for U.S. senator in Wyoming is worth over thirty times what a vote for U.S. senator in California is worth. (Statistics available on demand.) Since there is no practical way to determine how "worthy" a person is to vote -- and in our past we've tried property ownership, gender, race, literacy and a host of other so-called qualifiers -- the only solution is one (adult) person, one vote. Live with it...
2007-09-14 14:29:03 · answer #2 · answered by Hispanophile 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe they shouldn't but that is their business. We have to have some faith in democracy, meaning that each person must be his or her own judge of what is best for themselves. And even if we thought it was a good idea to require people to have some knowledge before voting, how would we enforce that? Make voters take a news quiz before accepting their ballot? Also there are quite a few people who have good knowledge of current events, but who nevertheless make decisions based on questionable criteria, and there really is no way to protect against that.
2007-09-14 14:22:17 · answer #3 · answered by rollo_tomassi423 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Those people are usually the ones that do not vote. But yes I think one should have a certain degree of knowledge of what is going on in today's society before they can vote, otherwise someone completely undeserving could win if somehow people just vote for them.
2007-09-14 14:22:52 · answer #4 · answered by Rocketman 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Not in my opinion... but if they don't care enough to keep up with current events, then they also shouldn't ***** and moan if their elected official makes a decision they don't like...
2007-09-14 14:23:59 · answer #5 · answered by NCAATrackAthlete 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Between the biased newscasting of CNN and Fox, the question is anybody able to really know what's going on anymore?
2007-09-14 14:27:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If they didn't, very few democrats would get elected. There really should be a test of some type that tested basic knowledge before one was allowed to vote.
2007-09-14 14:20:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
No... Geez.... I'm not voting...LOL...
I don't want to be responsible for
picking the woman or the black guy.
I would probably pick the black guy,
he is cool... No.... Nope.....
No... I would pick the woman... that would
make men feel small...LOL. J.K.
Sorry... I am on my pain Meds.
2007-09-14 14:25:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. There is a 50/50 chance they will pick the right candidate.
2007-09-14 14:22:02 · answer #9 · answered by regerugged 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Maybe not, but they should still have the right to do so. Anything else would be facist.
2007-09-14 14:29:22 · answer #10 · answered by amancalledj 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋