Some people are so stupid, and they vote for somebody without any idea what they're voting for. Should those stupid people be discourtaged from voting?
Example would be if someone voted for a candidate because they liked their smile only. I've known people who have voted this way, and it's so stupid!
2007-09-15 08:29:22 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
They're not tested before running for office, so I don't see the point.
2007-09-15 08:33:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
The South used to have mandatory iq tests. They also had reading tests. But they did this to block black people from voting. There have also been laws saying that you can only vote if you own property - to block the poor from voting. If you are an American citizen who is eighteen years old you should have the right to vote because the elected leaders will have some control over your life. Admittably this causes problems. People will vote for someone if the candidate promises more welfare, or has a handsome face. But just because someone is selfish or shallow doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to vote. You suggest workshops to teach people about the political systems, but the teachers would only impose their own political beliefs on others.
2016-05-20 03:57:36 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. A vote is your right. Besides, stupidity is very relative - especially when you're talking about politics.
For instance you could go to South America and live with a tribe, not one of whom can read or write - but you try surviving in the jungle for more than a couple of days. Are they stupid because they can't read? Are you stupid because you don't know which plants are poisonous?
A similar thing could be applied to politics - are conservatives stupid because they don't believe the poor should have a safety net, or are liberals stupid because they dole out money to lazy, undeserving people?
People may be very very foolish and throw away their vote, but I would certainly not say that people with a low IQ are MORE likely to vote for someone based on superficial characteristics. How many people voted for Bush just because he wasn't Kerry, or just because he was republican, and that's the way they always vote? I'd say it was almost certainly the majority; neither of which is a good reason to vote for someone.
2007-09-15 08:59:33 · answer #3 · answered by Mordent 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
That was the original idea behind the electoral college. They would vote for the person who they believed to be the best regardless of how the people of that state voted. Now they vote based on the popular vote of the state. That is how Bush got elected in the first place. He lost the popular vote, but won the electoral votes because he got the big states that have more votes. It would be better to just count the popular votes instead of continuing with this electoral college.
Besides, most of the clueless people don't bother to vote.
2007-09-15 08:36:38 · answer #4 · answered by Gypsy Girl 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. In the US anyone over 18 can vote, if registered. People vote against a candidate as often as people vote for a candidate.
Voting is done in privacy, so no can really know the reason a person votes for a particular candidate.
2007-09-15 08:34:38 · answer #5 · answered by regerugged 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It is very unfortunate, and sometimes even dangerous, but there is a problem in that there's a long history in the USA of "literacy tests" which were given to black voters in the South during the Jim Crow days.
There's a joke about this, which is a bit of gallows humor. A black man went to register to vote in Mississippi. The elections clerk gave him a slip of paper to read. He looked at it and saw Chinese characters. "I know what this says," said the black man.
"Really?" asked the elections clerk.
"Yes. It says no black man's going to vote in Mississippi this year."
I'm not saying the kind of IQ tests that would be given now would be this blatantly unfair, but there would always be the potential for abuse if partisan local elections officials were in charge. What might be fair would be requiring people to pass the citizenship test given to immigrants in order to vote, but the courts have ruled strictly against this sort of thing, so it would require a constitutional amendment. It won't happen.
2007-09-15 08:36:32 · answer #6 · answered by Thomas M 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I love that idea. It'd keep Hillary Clinton out of office for sure. There should also be an IQ test required before anyone is allowed to have children, because there are so many people these days who have kids but shouldn't.
2007-09-15 09:24:22 · answer #7 · answered by Martin523 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
What's the matter? You think that people with limited intellect don't deserve representation by their government? They should just be discounted as cattle? You are going to decide what is best for them? What an ego! What ignorance!
Everyone deserves a vote. Who are you? You must be queen genius to think that someone else doesn't deserve to vote. We should all bow down to your superior intellect and let you decide what is best for us.
Get a clue, queen genius. You are a snob, and very un-American.
2007-09-15 08:33:16 · answer #8 · answered by Chef 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Bad choices are made by people with both Low and High IQ's. Sounds to me like you want to bring back the Jim Crow Laws and just change the wording to include only people with High IQ's.
2007-09-15 09:52:30 · answer #9 · answered by Michael M 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, intelligence shouldn't be a factor. If you are a citizen and pay taxes, you have earned the right to vote.
What we should never have is an elitist system in which only the smartest or richest get to vote.
2007-09-15 11:35:07 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
If only informed citizens voted how would the Democrats survive?
2007-09-15 08:49:26 · answer #11 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋