Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The time has come to make you vote
Yahoo News ^ | May 1, 2014 | Matt Bai

Posted on 05/02/2014 9:42:07 AM PDT by QT3.14

[SNIP]...Let's first consider the situation in which we find ourselves. Once again this year, the two parties that dominate our politics will conduct parallel campaigns aimed at two distinct subsets of Americans, rather than engaging in any actual debate. One side will scream about liberal overreach and the other will scream about conservative greed and bigotry, and whoever arouses the most passion in their most reliable voters (generally the party out of power at the moment) will probably win.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: elections; vote
Mandatory voting? Will it be like ZeroCare? If you don't vote you'll be penalized by the IRS?

What better way to monitor how we vote.

1 posted on 05/02/2014 9:42:07 AM PDT by QT3.14
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: QT3.14

so much for a free country

- None of the above


2 posted on 05/02/2014 9:44:48 AM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: QT3.14

Nope. This would never fly in court. No one can force you to vote and, just as you have a right to participate in the electoral/political process, you also have a right not to do so.


3 posted on 05/02/2014 9:47:28 AM PDT by gdani (Every day, your Govt surveils you more than the day before)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: QT3.14

Mandatory voting works pretty well in North Korea. They get a great turnout, so why not here?


4 posted on 05/02/2014 9:47:45 AM PDT by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: QT3.14

We need some mandatory NOT voting. Keep welfare recipients from voting, like we do felons.


5 posted on 05/02/2014 9:49:28 AM PDT by MUDDOG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gdani
This would never fly in court. No one can force you to vote

Just like how no one can force you to buy something?

(forgot about Justice Roberts, eh?)


6 posted on 05/02/2014 9:52:06 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: QT3.14
Da’ comrade. You will condone the criminals in power.

This column illustrates why rats just love democracy and high turnout. It gives the patina of legitimacy to illegal acts.

“I got 51% of the 95% who voted. I owe it to them to redistribute rights to my supporters.”

7 posted on 05/02/2014 9:52:38 AM PDT by Jacquerie (By their oaths, it is the duty of state legislators to invoke Article V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gdani

....just like you don’t have to engage in interstate commerce if you don’t want to! re: the Supine Court’s ruling requiring participation in Obama-Care!


8 posted on 05/02/2014 9:52:57 AM PDT by mason-dixon (As Mason said to Dixon, you have to draw the line somewhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: QT3.14
One side will scream about liberal overreach and the other will scream about conservative greed and bigotry, and whoever arouses the most passion in their most reliable voters (generally the party out of power at the moment) will probably win.

Does the truth matter at all?

The State has overreached badly, it is choking us to death; both sides have their greedy (btw the State epitomizes greed); and "conservative bigotry" is a straight up slander.

9 posted on 05/02/2014 9:53:18 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gdani
Scotus rewrote Obamacare’s penalty into a tax, and determined the government can force us to buy what it wishes.

In comparison, it is a very short intellectual walk to sanction mandatory voting.

10 posted on 05/02/2014 9:55:23 AM PDT by Jacquerie (By their oaths, it is the duty of state legislators to invoke Article V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: QT3.14

What a dumb idea. Aside from the anti-freedom aspects noted upthread, one of he biggest problems with voting today is that too many people are voting without any understanding of the issue. We need to be actively suppressing the number of low-information voters (LIVs), not making more of them.


11 posted on 05/02/2014 9:55:28 AM PDT by kevkrom (I'm not an unreasonable man... well, actually, I am. But hear me out anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

I was thinking along the same lines. Of course that would give illegals a foot in the door.


12 posted on 05/02/2014 9:55:47 AM PDT by QT3.14
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: QT3.14

Forced voting is the wrong solution to the problem. We don’t have lousy candidates because people don’t vote, people don’t vote because neither party can put up candidates worth voting for. I vote every time ballots are distributed, but I don’t necessarily vote in every individual race because there’s so regularly nobody worth a damn.


13 posted on 05/02/2014 10:01:21 AM PDT by discostu (Seriously, do we no longer do "phrasing"?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kevkrom
What a dumb idea.

It's Matt Bai.
14 posted on 05/02/2014 10:02:43 AM PDT by andyk (I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MUDDOG
Your idea is sound. There is an obvious conflict of interest in anyone who is being paid for not having worked, being able to vote for those who determine the level of that pay.

See Threat To Liberty.

On the subject of "Welfare," note how much better it worked in Jefferson's day, if you really want to make a point: Thomas Jefferson On Welfare.

William Flax

15 posted on 05/02/2014 10:04:16 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: QT3.14
We should definitely be like North Korea and institute mandatory voting. We could build a wall around America to prevent vote refusniks from leaving, but we should give the illegals time to get out if they are wise enough.
16 posted on 05/02/2014 10:10:33 AM PDT by Navy Patriot (Join the Democrats, it's not Fascism when WE do it, and the Constitution and law mean what WE say.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
Up until at least the 1930s, a number of states had "pauper laws" which kept welfare recipients from voting. This was distinct from poll taxes, which were ruled unconstitutional in the 1960s.

As far as I know, such pauper laws have never been found unconstitutional. (But I'm no expert by any means; my legal research is a google search!)

The disenfanchisement of felons is subject to the jurisdiction of the individual states, so why not paupers?

17 posted on 05/02/2014 10:11:31 AM PDT by MUDDOG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Click The Pic To Donate

Support FR, Donate Monthly If You Can

18 posted on 05/02/2014 10:13:12 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

“it is a very short intellectual walk”

If you don’t vote, you are taxed at
$2500 per election cycle.

Don’t worry. It’s just a tax.

What will be the tax on anti-same-
sex-marriage candidates who run
for public office?


19 posted on 05/02/2014 10:16:53 AM PDT by WKTimpco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: QT3.14

Ya just gotta love how the “Progressives” have lately been trying to recycle so much of the repression imposed by the old, failed Soviet Union dictatorship. First it will be “enforced” voting; soon the only candidates on the ballot will be Demokrats.


20 posted on 05/02/2014 10:20:24 AM PDT by catnipman (Cat Nipman: Vote Republican in 2012 and only be called racist one more time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: andyk

A number of countries do this. Mainly ones with very small populations who have legitimate concerns about organized groups of nutballs exploiting low turnout to hijack the government.

In some of the larger countries that do this, you must show proof that you voted in order to access government benefits. THAT is where Bai is headed with this.


21 posted on 05/02/2014 10:31:01 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MUDDOG
The disenfanchisement of felons is subject to the jurisdiction of the individual states, so why not paupers?

Actually all control of the franchise is supposed to be with the States. (Article I, Sec. 2) The restrictions as to racial criteria, sexual criteria, poll taxes, and those under 21, were all handled by specific Constitutional Amendments.

William Flax

22 posted on 05/02/2014 10:32:15 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
I see you've given a lot of thought to this.

The right to vote has been extended while personal rights have been more and more restricted. Not a good trade-off.

23 posted on 05/02/2014 10:42:06 AM PDT by MUDDOG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: QT3.14

Mandatory voting would not work unless there would be a selection for ‘None of the above’.

I wonder if they mean mandatory voting as in in the USSR or Cuba.....with a machine gun pointed at you to make sure that you ‘vote’ for the current totalitarian.


24 posted on 05/02/2014 10:47:49 AM PDT by spel_grammer_an_punct_polise (What we need is to sucker the fedthugs into a "Tiananmen Square"-like incident on the National Mall!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Mr. Bai realizes that a large number of reliable dem voters don’t participate in non presidential elections. Thus the desire to make voting mandatory. His attempt to dress up the scheme as a nonpartisan concern over a broken system is amusing. All in all I find the article encouraging. The dems must see looming electoral disaster if they’re grasping at fairydust ‘solutions’ like this one.


25 posted on 05/02/2014 11:28:17 AM PDT by pluvmantelo (Sure would be nice if the same articles weren't posted multiple times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog
In some of the larger countries that do this, you must show proof that you voted in order to access government benefits. THAT is where Bai is headed with this.

That's even MORE insidious! I seriously doubt most of those folks are voting to constrain the size or growth of government.
26 posted on 05/02/2014 11:52:27 AM PDT by andyk (I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson