Should the right to vote be restricted?

[Gwiez]

Really the only sort of Vote restriction we need is Voter IDs Laws. You bring your photo-ID with you if your voting, so that only 1 ballot is cast per person. If your too lazy to apply for a free Identification Card, you shouldn't be voting. Any politician against something as simple as that, or who claims a free card is somehow restricting the minority; is probably part of a party that uses a lot of ballots cast by people illegally anyways, or simply stated trying to cheat to remain in office.

You guys can decide which political party that applies to best.

Walk in voter fraud is incredibly rare. Much much less than mail-in absentee voter fraud. There are places where a person has to go over 100 miles to get a state id. They aren't lazy, they have jobs they can't get time off from to make a day trip. And no car in which to do it. Anyone who tries to disguise voter suppression as "preventing voter fraud" is probably part of a party that needs to suppress votes in order to win elections, and incidentally benefits from mail-in voter fraud the most. You know which political party that is.

[anveena]

Yeah. If you're on welfare you can't vote.

[primalmatter]

Actually free or ''we open the DMV thirty seconds on friday between midnight and 1 AM '' ? Or like ''duh gud uld times'', when real American patriots were totally not preventing Blacks to vote by stroking big manly guns in front of voting booths and doing hilarious pranks like burning black homes with Blacks inside ? (after all, those Blacks were ''luzy'' to not got to vote with the said pure American patriots dangling nooses in front of them, the kind of ''KLUVER ELEKTORAL TAKTIK'' beloved in the Deep South)

I think your take on history would be a rather amusing read.

Ever think of writing a novel?

[sarahtasher]

I think your take on history would be a rather amusing read.

Ever think of writing a novel?

Yeah, Blacks did not vote in the Deep South before 1960 because they were lazy bums, not because Aryan studs got lionized for acts of heroism such as ''getting in mobs of 100 with firearms to lynch a random black while the alleged law enforcement is busy beating up the relatives of the black''. The only kind of ''fight'' the KKK was able of,

[Azadina]

Every time someone suggests something like that, you just know the underlying idea is to exclude whatever population is deemed undesirable.

No, you don't get to be picky about who votes, that's way too easy to manipulate and undermines the fundamental principle of modern democracy. Universal suffrage, for everyone. Nobody gets silenced because of their life experiences, income, birth, race or whatnot.

It's not even hard to guess one of the population sections it's intending to target. First he votes for god king that bans certain section of population from military service, then the OP says military service should be needed for voting. How very subtle.

[The Penguin]

First you'd have to prove that it's statistically a significant problem.

Then you'd need mandatory voting

Then you'd need an objective body that could secure the electronic voting process

Then you'd need to ban redistricting and gerrymandering, let a proven unbiased algorithm district the states

Then you'd need to limit spending on political campaigns

Then you'd need to bust up the media monopolies that operate in the US(tons of local news stations are owned by one corporation)

Then you'd need seriously harsh penalties for lobbyists and politicians caught conspiring

Then you'd need to block all cross seeding, as in you cant be the lawyer of this corporation then be appointed to head a board that regulates that corporation.

I think as long as that ID will be delivered to your work space/home place, and there's a holiday for voting - where it's illegal for anyone to be forced to work, and there's a government mandated polling process whereby everyone needs to be able to vote in a timely manner within reasonable distance from their home.

If all of that happens then I'll believe you're not just trying to hide your attempt to restrict the voting rights of the working poor to solve a statistically nonexistent problem.

I'm sure you're also in support of all these important measures that are infringing on a free and fair voting process.

-It is a problem if more than 100 fake ballots are cast, and many many more were in California.
-Mandatory Voting is not necessary for the same reason as the ACA's Individual Mandate. It's people's right to abstain.
-We have that already, and it would be streamlined if a Voter ID was required to log into the ballot system acting as the 'key'.
-I'm always for that. California is rife with a lot of that. Hell lets get rid of the "all or nothing" rule while we're at it.
-I'm completely fine with that. No politician should have a "War Chest" like a certain female in recent memory.
-Again completely fine with that. Google should be broken into smaller companies for competition's sake.
-Fine with Lobbying being illegal. Same with Conspiring Politicians. Schultz should be in jail for what she did to Sanders.
-If they divest their finances to a third party for the period of the Campaign, that's probably enough.
-Agree with all of those things. A federal holiday set aside so people can vote (or take the day off) would be ideal.

I guess this is the part where you agree with me then. Cheers.

[Nathasil]

In the vast majority of democratic countries the right to vote is heavily restricted. Both legally and, much more common, socially, by requiring people to travel far to vote...or acquire papers...or voting on days large volumes of the populace cannot vote because of their work schedule. Or jerrymandering districts in a way that a lot of votes simply do not count, no matter if these people go and vote or not.

So the question seems very academic to me.

[sarahtasher]

-It is a problem if more than 100 fake ballots are cast, and many many more were in California.
-Mandatory Voting is not necessary for the same reason as the Individual Mandate. It's people's right to abstain.
-We have that already, and it would be streamlined if a Voter ID was required to log into the ballot system acting as the 'key'.
-I'm always for that. California is rife with a lot of that. Hell lets get rid of the "all or nothing" rule while we're at it.
-I'm completely fine with that. No politician should have a "War Chest" like a certain female in recent memory.
-Again completely fine with that. Google should be broken into smaller companies for competition's sake.
-Fine with Lobbying being illegal. Same with Conspiring Politicians. Schultz should be in jail for what she did to Sanders.
-If they divest their finances to a third party for the period of the Campaign, that's probably enough.
-Agree with all of those things. A federal holiday set aside so people can vote (or take the day off) would be ideal.

I guess this is the part where you agree with me then. Cheers.

''More than 100 fake ballots cast'' would not be a real problem even for the municipal election of a town of 20 000 people''. I'm also sure you are totally for broking defence contractors and Koch Brothers. Sure of it.

[Theinquisition]

I'm not against the idea of some sort of public service requirement to gain the right to vote, whether it be military, or a form of community service, like 2000 hours.

[Astalnar]

The right to vote is already restricted. In most general term, you need to be at least 18 or 21 (depends on the country) years old before you can vote.

Heinlein actually played with the idea of restricting the status of a citizen to only those people who demonstrate they are willing to put the good of the many before their own interests. Namely, by serving in the army for a set period of time. He explored in theme in depth in his novel Starship Troopers. To be honest, he took heavy inspiration from Plato's Republic, and Plato wasn't a fan of democracy ever since the demos condemned his teacher Socrates to death sentence.

[Theinquisition]

In the early days of the US only white male, property owners could vote. Over the years they removed restrictions with women getting the vote in like 1920.

Yeah, and look where it's got us.

[Iphie]

At times I feel voter restriction has it's merits, especially when a vote turns out in a way I don't like, but on the whole I'm pretty comfortable with the way things are. As for ID's, I find it odd, nowhere where I have lived can you vote without ID.

[cparle87]

Nope but their should be a drivers license I.d required to vote and a data base making sure you are legally a citizen of the u.s.

I've made that argument before, only to be buried under a deluge of "you're bigoted against the poor who can't afford to take a day off work to go to the DMV to get an ID" and other such nonsense.

[JerseyGhoul]

Yeah. If you're on welfare you can't vote.

That would be interesting to apply at a state level. Suddenly red states don’t get electoral votes.

[cparle87]

Yeah, and look where it's got us.

Voting age was also originally 21. This led to protests that you could be shipped off to war at 18 but couldn't vote against the country participating in it.

[anveena]

That would be interesting to apply at a state level. Suddenly red states don’t get electoral votes.

blue states don't get funding from the federal government

[Moralgy]

That is such a terrible idea. We had that kind of system in the country at one time, and it was fucking atrocious. All it does is give those with money almost never ending power over those without.

[Azadina]

I'm not against the idea of some sort of public service requirement to gain the right to vote, whether it be military, or a form of community service, like 2000 hours.

I wonder if you'd still be for the idea, if any service prior to the legislation was not credited towards it.

[Noradin]

Yes, exclude small children and non-sentinent spezies.

[Theinquisition]

Voting age was also originally 21. This led to protests that you could be shipped off to war at 18 but couldn't vote against the country participating in it.

I was being sarcastic