2
   

Experts Push Competency Test For Voters Suffering Dementia

 
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Sep, 2004 10:36 am
Oh, really -- if they tested the registered voters for competancy, we'd loose 70% to 80% of the voters.

Not so fast -- myself excepted. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Sep, 2004 11:12 am
In my view, there are a lot of people who really don't know what they are doing when they vote. The difference is, there is no one in the voting booth moving their hands, or telling them what to do.

As others have said, if we allowed people to vote strictly on intellectual ability, and knowledge of what is going on, many, many people would be disenfranchised. And that would not be a good thing. My concern is where there are people who have someone else "pull the strings" for them, literally, where the voter him/herself has no real choice in the matter, or even knowledge of what is happening.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Sep, 2004 12:41 pm
Phoenix32890 wrote:
As others have said, if we allowed people to vote strictly on intellectual ability, and knowledge of what is going on, many, many people would be disenfranchised. And that would not be a good thing.

Why not?
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Sep, 2004 01:29 pm
Naw, let the rabble vote.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Sep, 2004 01:45 pm
Because people like me don't want people like you making decisions for the entire country.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Sep, 2004 01:54 pm
Conservative humor, an oxymoron.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Sep, 2004 07:05 pm
Phoenix32890 wrote:
In my view, there are a lot of people who really don't know what they are doing when they vote. The difference is, there is no one in the voting booth moving their hands, or telling them what to do.

As others have said, if we allowed people to vote strictly on intellectual ability, and knowledge of what is going on, many, many people would be disenfranchised. And that would not be a good thing. My concern is where there are people who have someone else "pull the strings" for them, literally, where the voter him/herself has no real choice in the matter, or even knowledge of what is happening.


I agree, if a person has no idea whatever of what is going on and another person is just using that person as another vote then that is wrong.

It is just that I don't think the political arena (so to speak) is the place to diagnose degrees of dementia nor should it ever be in a position where it recommends people get tested for dementia.

I personally think any good that can come of it is outweighed by the bad that can come of it.

Take the florida election in 2000 as an example. They really screwed up then and a lot of people didn't get to vote because they were "mistakenly" put down as felons and so were disqualified to vote. I sure wouldn't trust this same state with the same group of people whoever they were (democrat or republicans) to decide who has dementia and who does not.
0 Replies
 
padmasambava
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Sep, 2004 02:34 pm
If you could decide competency on a reasonable basis it wouldn't favor the republicans.

Better let the chips fall where they may and hope

a: that you're getting one vote per customer

b: that you're getting an honest count.

Then welcome President Kerry as being the candidate of the voter as opposed to the "likely voter."
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/23/2021 at 05:32:38