Wow. For real?

It's not pretty, but the voting majority is straight stupid. Something has to be done about it. The founding fathers never intended for such an unknowledgeable, parasitic mass to be the voting majority.

---

I have to agree with him, and that hurt to say.

I know how politics work. It's just like religion. Having an open debate about view points, differing of opinions, etc... and this is what you get.

---

It's not pretty, but the voting majority is straight stupid. Something has to be done about it. The founding fathers never intended for such an unknowledgeable, parasitic mass to be the voting majority.

The unknowledgeable are not limited by party lines. I've heard extremely stupid things from both parties and both parties find the other to be uneducated which gets us nowhere.


You do realize a voting majority voted for Bush a 2nd time...

---

One of these five requirements must be met to vote in federal elections:

 

Minimum Income (Must be national average based on cost of living at location) (This does not include household income)

Degree (Associates or higher)

In-Education or Skill training

Certified to vote (basically a CLEP on US Government)

Federally Employed (Incl. Military)

 

Just because everyone has the ability to vote doesn't mean they should. The Athenians believed that to vote you MUST be educated in politics, government, economics, and foreign affairs and you must contribute to the state. There was a reason for this. Just my opinion.

 

I'm an advocate of a voting license but for it to remain constitutional a couple of your ideas are a no go. 

 

1.) financial status can't be a factor, and that would be in direct contradiction of what the "founding fathers" established. It doesn't matter if someone's rich or poor and any restriction on voting based upon financial status could be argued as a poll tax (Illegal under the Civil RIghts Act).

 

2.) Education shouldn't be a factor, albeit I can't think of a way this would be unconstitutional but I'd have a problem with it. It's not that voters are always uneducated it's that many of them are lazy and just vote party lines. The goals not to weed voters out, it's to force them to be more responsible with their vote. A college education doesn't accomplish a voter being more or less responsible with their vote, heck post graduate degrees have nothing to do with their contribution to society. You're disqualifying hard working blue collar american's because they didn't go to college? 

 

3.) So now your basically saying if they have a job, I get what you're trying to accomplish but I think you're going about it backwards.

 

4.) Here's where I'm with you, establish a voters license. Make it as simple as passing the citizenship test, it would simply discourage the lazy voter from participating and that's the key to increasing the quality of votes we cast.

 

5.) Federal employee's are no different than private sector employee's. That includes police, firemen and military, we all play roles in society and the last thing we need is to establish some kind of cast system where federally employed citizens are held in higher regards then privately employed citizens. It irks me that at some level all the federal employee's forget it's the private citizen that funds all their paychecks, pensions, and benefits.

---

I'm an advocate of a voting license but for it to remain constitutional a couple of your ideas are a no go.


1.) financial status can't be a factor, and that would be in direct contradiction of what the "founding fathers" established. It doesn't matter if someone's rich or poor and any restriction on voting based upon financial status could be argued as a poll tax (Illegal under the Civil RIghts Act).


2.) Education shouldn't be a factor, albeit I can't think of a way this would be unconstitutional but I'd have a problem with it. It's not that voters are always uneducated it's that many of them are lazy and just vote party lines. The goals not to weed voters out, it's to force them to be more responsible with their vote. A college education doesn't accomplish a voter being more or less responsible with their vote, heck post graduate degrees have nothing to do with their contribution to society. You're disqualifying hard working blue collar american's because they didn't go to college?


3.) So now your basically saying if they have a job, I get what you're trying to accomplish but I think you're going about it backwards.


4.) Here's where I'm with you, establish a voters license. Make it as simple as passing the citizenship test, it would simply discourage the lazy voter from participating and that's the key to increasing the quality of votes we cast.


5.) Federal employee's are no different than private sector employee's. That includes police, firemen and military, we all play roles in society and the last thing we need is to establish some kind of cast system where federally employed citizens are held in higher regards then privately employed citizens. It irks me that at some level all the federal employee's forget it's the private citizen that funds all their paychecks, pensions, and benefits.

You put way too much effort into answering that senseless post, Eric. I'm sure the conditions be outlined fit him and his ilk perfectly. He's not aiming for fairness and better democracy.

---

You put way too much effort into answering that senseless post, Eric. I'm sure the conditions be outlined fit him and his ilk perfectly. He's not aiming for fairness and better democracy.

 

Fair enough I was giving him the benefit of doubt. 

---

Fair enough I was giving him the benefit of doubt.

It was the magnanimous thing to do so you can't be faulted. But, we've found out a few facts concerning the personal life of Jaguar Warrior:


a) He makes the "Minimum Income".


b ) He has an associates degree or higher and/or possesses some skill he deems important.


c) In delicious irony, believes he's pretty smart in how our democratic government works.


d) Is either a federal employee or in the military.


I'm sure the list would whittle qualifiers down to knowing his cousin Earl's middle name if he thought only the right people knew it.

---

homebiscuit -

 

Those are all baseless assumptions, and not true. You did not argue a single point, yet attack me personally. You are the epitome of the modern American voter. The standard bearer of the ignorant citizen. Moronic, clueless, illogical, and selfish. Congratulations on being a blue-pilled sheep.

 

Eric, thank you for properly addressing each point. The purpose for those five points are:

 

1. By reaching the minimum income, you are either providing a valuable skill to the work force, or producing something valuable to society. To reach this level, you must have some common semblance of intelligence in managing finance and a general understanding of basic economics. You can argue people can fall into income, which is true, but doesn't deter the fact that they still must manage it, and it is still taxed.

2. Education is definitely important. The more educated the voting base is, the more likely they are to vote on knowledge rather than emotion. You shouldn't look at this from the "All colleges are liberal" standpoint, but rather that a person who understands why they are voting for an individual is a much better voter than someone who votes the party line. You don't need a college education to understand, but it is an important base line. Plus, most modern college tracks require government, history, finance, or economics classes.

3. Skills training is trying to reach #1, while in-education is trying to reach #1 or #2. Both are valuable to society.

4. For those who don't want to or cant reach #1 or #2, but can still be valuable voters.

5. If you work for the government, you have a say in it's direction.

 

By reaching one of these 5 points, you have either proven value to society, or knowledgeable enough to vote.

 

None of these objectives are out of the reach for any US citizen, but keep parasites and valueless sheep like homebiscuit from voting the US into extreme debt, pointless wars, unethical economic practice, and unlawful expansion.

---

homebiscuit -


Those are all baseless assumptions, and not true. You did not argue a single point, yet attack me personally. You are the epitome of the modern American voter. The standard bearer of the ignorant citizen. Moronic, clueless, illogical, and selfish. Congratulations on being a blue-pilled sheep.


Eric, thank you for properly addressing each point. The purpose for those five points are:


1. By reaching the minimum income, you are either providing a valuable skill to the work force, or producing something valuable to society. To reach this level, you must have some common semblance of intelligence in managing finance and a general understanding of basic economics. You can argue people can fall into income, which is true, but doesn't deter the fact that they still must manage it, and it is still taxed.

2. Education is definitely important. The more educated the voting base is, the more likely they are to vote on knowledge rather than emotion. You shouldn't look at this from the "All colleges are liberal" standpoint, but rather that a person who understands why they are voting for an individual is a much better voter than someone who votes the party line. You don't need a college education to understand, but it is an important base line. Plus, most modern college tracks require government, history, finance, or economics classes.

3. Skills training is trying to reach #1, while in-education is trying to reach #1 or #2. Both are valuable to society.

4. For those who don't want to or cant reach #1 or #2, but can still be valuable voters.

5. If you work for the government, you have a say in it's direction.


By reaching one of these 5 points, you have either proven value to society, or knowledgeable enough to vote.


None of these objectives are out of the reach for any US citizen, but keep parasites and valueless sheep like homebiscuit from voting the US into extreme debt, pointless wars, unethical economic practice, and unlawful expansion.

*sigh* Oh lord...

---

Nice rebuttal. Your contributions to the topic are paramount.

---

Nice rebuttal. Your contributions to the topic are paramount.

To what, your fascist diatribe? It's too stupid to debate.

---

homebiscuit -

 

Those are all baseless assumptions, and not true. You did not argue a single point, yet attack me personally. You are the epitome of the modern American voter. The standard bearer of the ignorant citizen. Moronic, clueless, illogical, and selfish. Congratulations on being a blue-pilled sheep.

 

Eric, thank you for properly addressing each point. The purpose for those five points are:

 

1. By reaching the minimum income, you are either providing a valuable skill to the work force, or producing something valuable to society. To reach this level, you must have some common semblance of intelligence in managing finance and a general understanding of basic economics. You can argue people can fall into income, which is true, but doesn't deter the fact that they still must manage it, and it is still taxed.

2. Education is definitely important. The more educated the voting base is, the more likely they are to vote on knowledge rather than emotion. You shouldn't look at this from the "All colleges are liberal" standpoint, but rather that a person who understands why they are voting for an individual is a much better voter than someone who votes the party line. You don't need a college education to understand, but it is an important base line. Plus, most modern college tracks require government, history, finance, or economics classes.

3. Skills training is trying to reach #1, while in-education is trying to reach #1 or #2. Both are valuable to society.

4. For those who don't want to or cant reach #1 or #2, but can still be valuable voters.

5. If you work for the government, you have a say in it's direction.

 

By reaching one of these 5 points, you have either proven value to society, or knowledgeable enough to vote.

 

None of these objectives are out of the reach for any US citizen, but keep parasites and valueless sheep like homebiscuit from voting the US into extreme debt, pointless wars, unethical economic practice, and unlawful expansion.

 

The government works for the citizens, the citizens have a say. If you work for the government you are a public servant.

---

The government works for the citizens, the citizens have a say. If you work for the government you are a public servant.

Yeah, that is utterly ridiculous.

---

I have yet to meet an intelligent liberal. That is the answer to your question.

 

Words like educated, intelligent, or coherent render the word liberal an oxymoron.

Ah, yes, everybody that has a different opinion than you is unintelligent.

---

Ah, yes, everybody that has a different opinion than you is unintelligent.

No, they're trolls.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Ah, yes, everybody that has a different opinion than you is unintelligent.

It's kind of sad people live in this little box with these narrow minded views of the world and people.

---

LOL..... uneducated voters....thats how Obama got elected. 

 

LOL.....uneducated voters.......that's how everybody gets elected. 


 

Always. 

---

One of these five requirements must be met to vote in federal elections:

 

Minimum Income (Must be national average based on cost of living at location) (This does not include household income)

Degree (Associates or higher)

In-Education or Skill training

Certified to vote (basically a CLEP on US Government)

Federally Employed (Incl. Military)

 

Just because everyone has the ability to vote doesn't mean they should. The Athenians believed that to vote you MUST be educated in politics, government, economics, and foreign affairs and you must contribute to the state. There was a reason for this. Just my opinion.

 

Or, and hear me out...


 

1- White


2- Land Owning


3- Males

---

Bush was elected twice. Not sure republicans should be calling out democrats for being unintelligent or uneducated. Just so ironic...

---

Or, and hear me out...


1- White

2- Land Owning

3- Males

Lol.

---