Aren’t we usually told (by the right) that if something gets caught by the system, it is a sign it isn’t a problem? Like those people released from death row because they were innocent is a sign that we don’t execute innocent people, because the appelate system works in getting them out.
So your link is demonstration that all is well and good in the voting world. What you need to provide us, of course, is evidence of voter fraud that hasn’t been dealt with through the system.
Oh, and you have to demonstrate it changed the course of the election. Evidence of fraud itself isn’t enough. Lets call it an AEDPA for electoral fraud.
I believe that every adult citizen of the US should be registered and encouraged to vote. Even the idiots. I can’t still call some of 'em idiots. There’s no tension there.
I don’t have to like someone to want them to vote. I don’t have to respect the choices people make to want them to have and exercise their rights.
It’s an interesting point, but I’m not sure it works.
Imagine a situation in which 100% of the unregistered voters are Democrats. Is it then automatically incorrect for federal funding to be used to register any of them?
What type of balance test is required (1 registered Dem for every registered Pub)? Or is it adequate to also allow for federal funding for groups that focus on Church members (as an example)?
The only way to ensure fairness (as you put it) would be to disallow federal funding for any voter registration efforts at all.
Bricker, your own “critical thinking skills” are far too good to play the argue-the-strawman game, but that’s how I see your post. And, BTW, how should we go about “educating voters”? One set of billionaires is buying the elections, while Murdoch educates with FoxNews single-handledly; doesn’t that tickle your fancy enough yet?
While there’s more than a grain of truth in your too-obvious-for-words examples, it is amusing that you pretend only Demos are partisan. Or is this the advocate system, and you expect the “opposite side” to post its own useless messages with counterexamples?
I’m afraid I’ll just resort to presenting facts. I got the following by just Googling “vote breakdown by education level”, clicking on first result and then clicking again to see 2004 exit poll results
Do let us not quibble about education level being a proxy for “critical thinking”; one makes do with the data one has and the exit pollers forgot to ask “Are you a critical thinker?”
What I see is “No High School” (likeliest group wanting welfare handout?) as a 49-50 wash. Bush beat Kerry at all the middle education levels, but the strongest lead in the charts was Kerry’s 55-44 advantage among Postgrads. Inconclusive? Maybe. But no support for the stupidest right-wing perspective on the question “How do critical thinkers vote?”.
IIRC, by far the biggest correlation in 2000 was church-going. Bush would have won by a landslide if only weekly churchgoers voted; Gore in a landslide if that group were excluded. Whether regular churchgoers are “critical thinkers” can be left for another thread (in another forum?)
Oh, I’m well aware of your gist, I’d just like you to actually have to say it.
What is it that you think ACORN was doing? Did they ask people if they were democrats before allowing them to fill out a registration form? Did they have some sort of a test? Secret hand shake? Did they refuse to submit registration forms they thought might vote republican (ie Mickie Mouse)?
If people in NYC tend to vote liberal, does that mean federal funds can’t be used there for registration? What about university students?
Maybe you could tell us how ACORN was being impartial when registering voters.
First, if they haven’t voted how can they be considered Republican or Democrat?
Second, even after voting, there is no way to actually know.
What’s sort of funny looking at the past three years, we could claim that Democrats made a push to register low income urban voters, who helped Obama win. Two years later, those same voters (now registered) helped the Republicans win. Net result was a wash, ergo, the registration drive was impartial.
I’ve reserved some fairly choice spots in Hell, given the near certainty of my prospects. Shall I put your name down, as well? Its on a slag hill with a nice view of Nixon roasting on a spit. (I have an “in” with Satan, used to be my father-in-law…)
I think voting should be mandatory, for the simple reason that it makes it less likely that the extremist elements (on either side), will sway elections just because they’re more motivated to vote.
As far as “voters can’t be trusted” I’d also say that dictators can’t be trusted either. Human beings in general can’t be trusted. Democracy is simply the lesser of evils.
Bricker, I think due to your privileged socioeconomic status you have a difficult time understanding the point of view of someone with less resources than you. There are some people who don’t have a car and thus the amount of effort they have to expend to get an ID are much higher than it is for someone like you. Sometimes people can’t even afford the $50 for an ID. Is it your position that poor people are less deserving of the franchise?
Again, looking back and the past few elections: Kerry lost to Bush because he was a giant tool, but also because of the motivation to vote against gay marriage. There was a push to get religiously conservative voters to the ballot boxes, it just sort of happened that they were already registered. This was a group that had been previously unmotivated. They didn’t care enough to vote one way or another.
In 2008, there was a push to get low income urban voters to the ballot boxes, the result was that they tended to vote for Obama. The difference in this case was that because they didn’t care about previous elections, they weren’t registered.
Now that the Democrats got them registered, the Republicans can get to work convincing them their taxes are going to suddenly be increased.
You are ignoring the racists. That would bump it up way past 10%.
BTW, I think you need to replace your top 10% number with perhaps a top 1% figure. The top 10% is largely well educated urban professionals who tend to vote Democrat.
There has been an income paradox in politics for a long time. racism explains some of it but not all of it.
