• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Don't Vote

rikzilla said:
Yes, but you must admit that Jefferson would be floored by the internet:
Click to expand...
The idea, certainly. I think he'd still be appalled by people's ignorance. Hell, I bet I don't come close to him intellectually, and I'm appalled.
 
Garrette said:
A+. 350 of 350. I took the test before reading anything besides the OP.

It's a stupid test and a stupid idea for voter eligibility.
Click to expand...

Same here. (Well, except that I missed one person's title because I didn't realize that my mouse click apparently didn't take, so I ended up answering "don't know" when I actually did know.)
 
Garrette said:
Suh! I wuz boan in the sovrun commonwealth of dear Kintuck, and I take umbrage, UMBRAGE I SAY!, at yoh insinuation that a man so honruble, so pyure, so upstandin as the rat honruble Senatore MuhKonnil would evah stoop so low as to sully his ivery finguhtips on that libertine instrument of Satan, the pyeannuh.

Apologize at once or name yoh second.


Kindly ignore that my silliness is written in an accent closer to Georgian than to Kentuckian. It sells better.
Click to expand...

That paragraph was written so perfectly that this New Yawker (who can't do an accent to save his life) could read that and pass for the Governor of Georgia circa 1910.
 
Tricky said:
I am proud to say I don't recognize Paris Hilton and can't spell Christine Agularia.
Click to expand...
I thought Christine Agularia was Gwen Stafani. Only got her and a few others by process of elimination.



eta: Thank Ed we vote by people's names and not by their pictures.
 
Metullus said:
I, too, think that there should be no test requirement to be eligible to vote. There are times, however, that my allegiance to that principle is sorely challenged.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I might even go so far as to say there should be no names on the ballot and that every vote has to be a write-in vote. If you can't bother to learn a candidate's name, you probably shouldn't be voting.
 
I got 332, but didn't quite deserve it. I guessed that Mitch McConnell dude, and also spotted the Hebrew writing for the Israeli P.M. I guessed the ki-Moon UN guy, but I could have said Japan emperor just as easily. I too depend on radio, local news channels, right-wing BS, and NPR, plus what I learn on this forum, and watch very little TV.

I vote BEEPS for president...Not that I'd be able to recognize his face.:p
 
HarryKeogh said:
For McConnel I picked pianist. I figured maybe he was one of those geeks who sings political satire songs.
Click to expand...

I did the same thing. I also got a B, though it would've been an A had I not been a smart $#% when I answered what Paris Hilton does. I stand by my answer though, I don't know.
 
Garrette said:
I certainly agree that I wish the electorate would become more educated in the pertinent issues, or just more educated in general. I'm still of the opinion that the pitfalls of any education tests as a prerequisite to voting outweigh the benefits.
Click to expand...

Then we should lower the voting age to at least 16 because many kids just finishing a government course know more about politics then the average adult.
 
B+. Not too shabby. But what does knowing what these people look like have to do with anything? After all, for some of these people I could know what position they hold and what their views are without knowing (or without remembering) what they look like.

As to the question of political literacy as a requirement for voting, it does indeed bother me that someone who knows absolutely nothing about current affairs gets a vote that counts just as much as mine. But I see no other way to conduct elections fairly. Literacy (political or otherwise) requirements have historically been abused to disenfranchise large segments of the population. The potential for abuse of such requirements (and the potential for interminable arguments over whether such-and-such constitutes an abuse of the requirement) is just too great. But the idea that everyone has a duty to vote whether they know anything or not is silly. I think that is where get out the vote campaigns go wrong. While I think it best for the country if people who are aware of their ignorance stay home on election day, I do not think they should be legally prevented from voting.
 
I think the "we should institute a test for voting" idea is an extremely dangerous path to go down, and one that can lead to tyranny and elitism.

There are two general principles that America was founded on: equality and liberty. I spend a lot of my time on this board defending liberty, but this is a time when I have to take a serious stand for equality. Instituiting a voting age is a horrific form of elitism that permits the few to decide for many. Arguing whether they're a "better informed few" is irrelevant- feudal lords and monarchs undoubtedly used the same logic to justify oppression.

This is an issue I take very seriously, so if anyone has a different opinion, I'd be interested to hear it. (And for a similar topic, see my thread on lowering the voting age from last summer here.)
 
I missed Mitch McConnell and Ban Ki-moon. Never had seen a picture of either (I would have recognized Kofi!). Good enough for an A though.
 
steverino said:
You scored that low, eh?;)
Click to expand...
It is inane and irrelevant for the reasons already given in this thread.

As far as your question is concerned, I actually decided to complete the test, even when it turned out to be a bogus piece of irrelevancy.

I managed a C. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom