The Republican Party Today

#101
#101
hog88 said:
Outside of the Starship Troopers example I mentioned earlier which is never going to happen, I really don’t know. I think a person should be vested in the country before having a say in how its run but I don’t know how to exactly qualify that.
Click to expand...
I don't know the starship troopers voter qualifications. How do you defined "vested?" Seems pretty subjective.
 
#103
#103
hog88 said:
And here’s the Rocky we all know and love. I haven’t misrepresented anything you have said, you piped up calling me an extremist and by your own words you are just as extreme as me. Probably a bit more since I wouldn’t disenfranchise felons who have completed their sentence and make it easier/faster for someone to become a citizen.
Click to expand...
lol. “I didn’t misrepresent anything here’s four more misrepresentations.”

The entire conversation is still on here. No need to try to rewrite it unless you weren’t happy with how it turned out the first time.
 
#107
#107
hog88 said:
If one suffrage test is extreme all are extreme.

Or you could just admit that some people shouldn't be voting and there needs to be qualifications to vote.
Click to expand...
You view voting that way but not the purchase of guns?

Extremist
 
#111
#111
hog88 said:
Funny how the right to vote isn’t a right that shall not be infringed.
Click to expand...
Funny how thoroughly you misinterpret.
Rational and reasonable restrictions to not infringe on anyone's right to keep and bear arms. That fact has been established by the courts.........over and over.
 
#113
#113
clarksvol00 said:
Seems arbitrary.
Click to expand...

It’s nonsensical, but also objectively far more extreme than even some kind of aptitude test and would result in less freedom.

Elections are a substitute for violent revolution. The threshold commitment for voting being far lower than “willing to risk death or commit murder” makes governments more accountable because the citizens’ risk side of the risk/reward matrix is lower so change is more appealing.

Inversely, raising the threshold for change by putting more restrictions on voting makes governments less responsive to demands of the populace, and/or completely unresponsive to the preferences of the disenfranchised.

For example, look at the very people mentioned, earlier: the “dreamers.” They have no path to vote and the only incentive the government has to respond to their issues is the extent to which voters care about them. Despite the fact that it’s a fairly popular issue, the support is insufficient because it isn’t an important enough issue to motivate voters who aren’t directly affected. Look at the history of black people in America, citizens of Russia, Iran, Syria, etc. etc. The disenfranchised have less liberty in almost every context until they rise up and force the government to give them the vote.
So if the very idea of Democratic systems is to not have to risk death to change government policy, requiring military service and some risk of death just to achieve the tool of nonviolent revolution is nonsensical.
 
#115
#115
clarksvol00 said:
Maybe I'm reading this wrong; but you want to restrict voting rights based on whether somebody is "vested," but you can't define "vested."
Click to expand...

Lots of room for discussion, ideas and opinions I’m not locked into any one method.
 
#116
#116
hog88 said:
Lots of room for discussion, ideas and opinions I’m not locked into any one method.
Click to expand...
All I'm seeing is that you would like to restrict voting rights based on some kind of subjective test involving "vesting," but have no idea what you want that test to be.
 
#118
#118
clarksvol00 said:
All I'm seeing is that you would like to restrict voting rights based on some kind of subjective test involving "vesting," but have no idea what you want that test to be.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It can’t be property ownership or a literacy test, maybe some combination of paying taxes, not on assistance or something. I don’t like the idea of people being able to vote themselves largeness. We already restrict who can vote so what’s the big deal?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland, AM64, Vol since 77 and 2 others
#119
#119
clarksvol00 said:
All I'm seeing is that you would like to restrict voting rights based on some kind of subjective test involving "vesting," but have no idea what you want that test to be.
Click to expand...

IMO, those that are able bodied, and have lived off the government for years should not be able to vote. Why should I care what a purposeful leach thinks?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#120
#120
hog88 said:
Exactly. It can’t be property ownership or a literacy test, maybe some combination of paying taxes, not on assistance or something. I don’t like the idea of people being able to vote themselves largeness. We already restrict who can vote so what’s the big deal?
Click to expand...
We already restrict who can buy a gun, so what's the big deal?
 
#121
#121
hog88 said:
Exactly. It can’t be property ownership or a literacy test, maybe some combination of paying taxes, not on assistance or something. I don’t like the idea of people being able to vote themselves largeness. We already restrict who can vote so what’s the big deal?
Click to expand...
Seems like your test is based on income.
 
#124
#124
norrislakevol said:
IMO, those that are able bodied, and have lived off the government for years should not be able to vote. Why should I care what a purposeful leach thinks?
Click to expand...
I'm not a purposeful leach, but why should I care what you think? Why should I, or anybody else, be governed by what you think?
 
#125
#125
hog88 said:
Exactly. It can’t be property ownership or a literacy test, maybe some combination of paying taxes, not on assistance or something. I don’t like the idea of people being able to vote themselves largeness. We already restrict who can vote so what’s the big deal?
Click to expand...


Taking the blood sucking voters off the voter rolls would mean several more Red States
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top