Skip to comments.Should we have some criteria to be a voter?
Posted on 05/24/2012 4:40:20 AM PDT by bestintxas
While I voted in the primary yesterday, I saw one women come up to the booth, look at the machine display for awhile, then turn around and asked the monitor
"Don't they have a straight-party ticket here?"
The monitor had to explain to her that this was a primary only on who from each party should be on the November ballot.
My question is simple:
Should some imbecile like that even be allowed to vote?
No wonder we have Obama as President, when idiots show up knowing nothing about why they are even there.
Heinlein’s ‘Starship Troopers’ had an interesting take on it.
I’d like to point out that the original post does not mention party; and that there is no need to mention party, since it is painfully obvious (and this reply continues in that vein).
One party is the party of the “party line”, from top to bottom, and promotes agenda-voting, talking points, what-can-my-party-do-for-me, voting based on emotion...
The other party is for the most part, the opposite to that.
YES,you should know the difference between s*** and shineola!
We don't hold our highest office to any!
“I believe owning real property (land, house, trailer, condo, etc.) should be a requirement for voting.”
I think most FReepers assume that you are being quite sarcastic, but the post is not even funny.
Besides the trailer, all the rest are real property, and I don’t think he’s being sarcastic at all. I agree - unless you own property and pay taxes, or serve in defense of the country, you should not vote.
Simplest requirement: be a net payer into the system. If you get more over the course of a year than you put in then you get to participate from the couch.
So soldiers and their families who live in on-post housing and honorably discharged veterans who rent an apartment don't have enough of a stake in their communities to vote?
“unless you own property and pay taxes”
You better reevaluate your post.
EVERYONE pays tax in America.
You want a country only for the elite.
That is nice in thought for a totalitarian country, but not America.
I was 28 before I bought my first property, but I worked like Hell to promote and campaign for Republicans from the age of 16.
If you are serious, elitist such as you are no better then the Communist.
It should be... You can vote if you paid Federal income tax over the time since the last election. To vote you present a picture ID and your returns. If people are smart enough to have these, then they are smart enough to vote.
Amen! That’s always been my problem with the argument that one must be a land owner. Even after my active duty hubby and I bought a house. The only reason that we did was because of our timing of our move to DC (the housing market was crashing but the BAH rates were not yet reflecting this). Otherwise...we’d either be in an apartment or on-post right now (probably an apartment, as I’m not even sure where soldiers stationed at the Pentagon are eligible for housing...Belvoir? Myer? IDK).
I would have been willing to give up my right to vote as just a military spouse if it were only for landowners and military. I’m not alone in that thought.
I assume by "programming" you mean making sure all worked correctly and were reset to zero? Hopefully not predetermining the outcome!
Wow, I didn't know the country was founded by communists! Thanks for the history lesson.
The founders only allowed male property owners to vote. Were they elitist communists? I guess that's somewhat of what they try to teach in liberal "public education" these days.
We have a representative democracy. Remember the woman who thought that she wouldn’t have to make any more car payments after Obama was elected? Do you think that she’s smarter now? What has her experience been over the past four years?
A soldier living in on-post housing can vote “absentee” in his/her home-of-record.
“I assume by “programming” you mean making sure all worked correctly and were reset to zero? Hopefully not predetermining the outcome! “
Duhhh, well of course.
There were no computerized machines then, and programing
consisted of inserting hundreds of spacers and other pieces of hardware to make turning a lever record for the indicated candidate.
Naturally,, all machines were then thoroughly tested by the election commission before being sent to the polls.
I personally believe there should be a filter - Photo ID, literacy, understanding of the Constitution, payment of taxes. No “grandfathering.”
Of course, that makes me a horrible racist or whatever.
Agree...100%. We could use their wisdom today not only on this matter but everything.
The Founders were on the right track when they limited the vote to landowners (those who had a dog in the fight because it was their work/effort/money that would be used to support government’s fiscal requirements). I’m a firm believer that, unless you are a productive member of society (employed and actually paying taxes) you should not be able to vote. Those who rely on others to fund their existence shouldn’t ever see the inside of a voting place. Many blame Women’s Suffrage as the blame for today’s ills and they have some standing. The real problem is that, like the “pro-choice-it’s-your-body” “feminisist” of today, they were co-opted and swayed by the same movement that gave them the vote - it had to be enticing to all of a sudden have a meaningful say in how society would go. Most didn’t realize that they already had a very meaningful say just by being women and for their crucial place/influence in the family. I believe the Women’s Suffrage movement opened the door for the deterioration of the family and the Leftists capitalized on it.
Duh. My point is...what if they don't own the property? A lot of junior soldiers use their parents' address as their home of record.