Should the U.S. Adopt a Civics Test in Order to Vote?

[Uncensored2008]

So let me ask... we have a standard test to become a U.S. citizen, so why could we not have a standard test to be able to vote?

Because Nazis like you would make it a loyalty test to the party and principles of Marxism.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Just like the title says... do you think voters should prove they understand how the government and voting process works in order to be eligible to vote? It's not something I necessarily agree on, but watching some members on this forum that have no idea how some parts of the government works, or know some of the laws has got me wondering if they understand what they are doing when they get in the voting booth.

Civics test and voter ID

 

[boedicca]

Just like the title says... do you think voters should prove they understand how the government and voting process works in order to be eligible to vote? It's not something I necessarily agree on, but watching some members on this forum that have no idea how some parts of the government works, or know some of the laws has got me wondering if they understand what they are doing when they get in the voting booth.

Civics test and voter ID

No to the first and yes to the second.

 

[jillian]

Nope.

That said, we need to go back to teaching civics

I find myself in the rare position of agreeing with Jillian.

One problem is test design, and another is test administration. I can see this turning quite quickly into a test of ideological purity to be able to vote.

We should go back to teaching civics, as well as the histories of America and West Civilization so that voters understand the philosophical foundations and prices paid to come up with the system to preserve our liberty.

Well, that argument is simplistic; if we're not going to do anything because of possible 'corruption', then there is no point in having laws, government, hospitals, roads, or anything else, because all of those can be 'corrupted' too. We should just rely on anarchy and Darwinism and not even bother with voting at all.

It's quite grounded in present day reality. Progs control almost all public education. They oppose the Electoral College, Federalism and other aspects of our Constitutional Republic which thwart their ability to control the rest of us. They go especially bonkers when they lose. Witness the unhinged hysteria about Kavanaugh and their attempts to smear and delegitimize him. I'd rather not have people like that decide what Civics to teach and what tests to design. As Progs promote Big Government, they are firmly entrenched in the bureaucracy and would have ample opportunity to design and enforce ideological purity via a civics test requirement to vote.

If you think that is not possible, take a look at what is going on on Google, FB and Twitter these days. Consider the suppression of conservative viewpoints a preview of coming Prog attractions.

And all of those are being exposed, and aren't supported by the public; if the public doesn't care, and doesn't change it, then the whole issue is moot anyway. Things get that way precisely because the stupid, illiterate, and uninformed were allowed to vote. You also over-estimate how long the current status quo is going to be allowed to operate.

Ah. Are you suggesting that some sort of Anointed Elite is going to save the Deplorables from themselves?

No. If people are educated m, deplorable would just go the way of the dinosaur. Where you belong.

 

[jillian]

Just like the title says... do you think voters should prove they understand how the government and voting process works in order to be eligible to vote? It's not something I necessarily agree on, but watching some members on this forum that have no idea how some parts of the government works, or know some of the laws has got me wondering if they understand what they are doing when they get in the voting booth.

You would need an ammendment to the constitution and good luck doing that...


And it is ironic you starting a thread about people not knowing ...



.

Why would you need an amendment to the constitution, know-nothing?

 

[Uncensored2008]

No. If people are educated m, deplorable would just go the way of the dinosaur. Where you belong.

If you had power, you would engage in genocide and slaughter anyone who expressed ideas contrary to the Stalinism you promote.

You are the Khmer Rouge.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Just like the title says... do you think voters should prove they understand how the government and voting process works in order to be eligible to vote? It's not something I necessarily agree on, but watching some members on this forum that have no idea how some parts of the government works, or know some of the laws has got me wondering if they understand what they are doing when they get in the voting booth.

You would need an ammendment to the constitution and good luck doing that...


And it is ironic you starting a thread about people not knowing ...



.

Why would you need an amendment to the constitution, know-nothing?

What a fucking retard you are fake lawyer.


{{meta.pageTitle}}

read and learn, Nazi gurl.

 

[boedicca]

I find myself in the rare position of agreeing with Jillian.

One problem is test design, and another is test administration. I can see this turning quite quickly into a test of ideological purity to be able to vote.

We should go back to teaching civics, as well as the histories of America and West Civilization so that voters understand the philosophical foundations and prices paid to come up with the system to preserve our liberty.

Well, that argument is simplistic; if we're not going to do anything because of possible 'corruption', then there is no point in having laws, government, hospitals, roads, or anything else, because all of those can be 'corrupted' too. We should just rely on anarchy and Darwinism and not even bother with voting at all.

It's quite grounded in present day reality. Progs control almost all public education. They oppose the Electoral College, Federalism and other aspects of our Constitutional Republic which thwart their ability to control the rest of us. They go especially bonkers when they lose. Witness the unhinged hysteria about Kavanaugh and their attempts to smear and delegitimize him. I'd rather not have people like that decide what Civics to teach and what tests to design. As Progs promote Big Government, they are firmly entrenched in the bureaucracy and would have ample opportunity to design and enforce ideological purity via a civics test requirement to vote.

If you think that is not possible, take a look at what is going on on Google, FB and Twitter these days. Consider the suppression of conservative viewpoints a preview of coming Prog attractions.

And all of those are being exposed, and aren't supported by the public; if the public doesn't care, and doesn't change it, then the whole issue is moot anyway. Things get that way precisely because the stupid, illiterate, and uninformed were allowed to vote. You also over-estimate how long the current status quo is going to be allowed to operate.

Ah. Are you suggesting that some sort of Anointed Elite is going to save the Deplorables from themselves?

No. If people are educated m, deplorable would just go the way of the dinosaur. Where you belong.

Sad Widdle Bitter Pillian is in very poor form today. As usual.

 

[Picaro]

Nope.

That said, we need to go back to teaching civics

I find myself in the rare position of agreeing with Jillian.

One problem is test design, and another is test administration. I can see this turning quite quickly into a test of ideological purity to be able to vote.

We should go back to teaching civics, as well as the histories of America and West Civilization so that voters understand the philosophical foundations and prices paid to come up with the system to preserve our liberty.

Well, that argument is simplistic; if we're not going to do anything because of possible 'corruption', then there is no point in having laws, government, hospitals, roads, or anything else, because all of those can be 'corrupted' too. We should just rely on anarchy and Darwinism and not even bother with voting at all.

It's quite grounded in present day reality. Progs control almost all public education. They oppose the Electoral College, Federalism and other aspects of our Constitutional Republic which thwart their ability to control the rest of us. They go especially bonkers when they lose. Witness the unhinged hysteria about Kavanaugh and their attempts to smear and delegitimize him. I'd rather not have people like that decide what Civics to teach and what tests to design. As Progs promote Big Government, they are firmly entrenched in the bureaucracy and would have ample opportunity to design and enforce ideological purity via a civics test requirement to vote.

If you think that is not possible, take a look at what is going on on Google, FB and Twitter these days. Consider the suppression of conservative viewpoints a preview of coming Prog attractions.

And all of those are being exposed, and aren't supported by the public; if the public doesn't care, and doesn't change it, then the whole issue is moot anyway. Things get that way precisely because the stupid, illiterate, and uninformed were allowed to vote. You also over-estimate how long the current status quo is going to be allowed to operate.

Ah. Are you suggesting that some sort of Anointed Elite is going to save the Deplorables from themselves?

What? Passing a basic civics test makes one an 'Anointed Elite'? You must live in California.

If passing basic civics tests makes one an 'Elite' in this country, it's best that nobody be allowed to vote, actually. The masses are indeed too stupid to be given such a responsibility.

 

[Picaro]

I like it just the way it is, anyone can pretty much vote or not vote and any US citizen can grow up and pretty much become president...the way it should be.


.

Unless they would rather spend the $100 million on something else.

 

[Picaro]

I find myself in the rare position of agreeing with Jillian.

One problem is test design, and another is test administration. I can see this turning quite quickly into a test of ideological purity to be able to vote.

We should go back to teaching civics, as well as the histories of America and West Civilization so that voters understand the philosophical foundations and prices paid to come up with the system to preserve our liberty.

Well, that argument is simplistic; if we're not going to do anything because of possible 'corruption', then there is no point in having laws, government, hospitals, roads, or anything else, because all of those can be 'corrupted' too. We should just rely on anarchy and Darwinism and not even bother with voting at all.

It's quite grounded in present day reality. Progs control almost all public education. They oppose the Electoral College, Federalism and other aspects of our Constitutional Republic which thwart their ability to control the rest of us. They go especially bonkers when they lose. Witness the unhinged hysteria about Kavanaugh and their attempts to smear and delegitimize him. I'd rather not have people like that decide what Civics to teach and what tests to design. As Progs promote Big Government, they are firmly entrenched in the bureaucracy and would have ample opportunity to design and enforce ideological purity via a civics test requirement to vote.

If you think that is not possible, take a look at what is going on on Google, FB and Twitter these days. Consider the suppression of conservative viewpoints a preview of coming Prog attractions.

And all of those are being exposed, and aren't supported by the public; if the public doesn't care, and doesn't change it, then the whole issue is moot anyway. Things get that way precisely because the stupid, illiterate, and uninformed were allowed to vote. You also over-estimate how long the current status quo is going to be allowed to operate.

Ah. Are you suggesting that some sort of Anointed Elite is going to save the Deplorables from themselves?

No. If people are educated m, deplorable would just go the way of the dinosaur. Where you belong.

Actually it would do away with 75% of the Democratic Party's base, which is why Democrats would oppose such a requirement.

 

[Freiheit]

The test would have to be dumbed down to the meaningless level to get more than 10% of the population to pass it.

 

[Lewdog]

I'm actually surprised how close the vote is on this.

 

[Picaro]

The test would have to be dumbed down to the meaningless level to get more than 10% of the population to pass it.

Then so be it; if we only have a 10% literacy rate here then any kind of republican democracy isn't viable anyway.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Actually it would do away with 75% of the Democratic Party's base, which is why Democrats would oppose such a requirement.

That would depend greatly on how much power the Democrats have over the manner in which such a requirement is crafted and applied. This is exactly the point—the “literacy tests” of old were specifically crafted and applied to disenfranchise that those in charge of these tests wanted to prevent from voting, exactly as the Democrats would do with any such test of they were allowed to apply it today.

In a state such as California, which is thoroughly ruled by hopelessly-corrupt Democrats, do you really believe that any “civics test” imposed as a condition of voting would not be blatantly crafted and applied in order to disenfranchise Republican/conservative voters?

 

[Lewdog]

Actually it would do away with 75% of the Democratic Party's base, which is why Democrats would oppose such a requirement.

That would depend greatly on how much power the Democrats have over the manner in which such a requirement is crafted and applied. This is exactly the point—the “literacy tests” of old were specifically crafted and applied to disenfranchise that those in charge of these tests wanted to prevent from voting, exactly as the Democrats would do with any such test of they were allowed to apply it today.

In a state such as California, which is thoroughly ruled by hopelessly-corrupt Democrats, do you really believe that any “civics test” imposed as a condition of voting would not be blatantly crafted and applied in order to disenfranchise Republican/conservative voters?

If they craft a civics test like the one used to become a U.S. citizen how the fuck are they going to make it so that people of only one political party can pass it??? It would be simple shit like name the three branches of the federal government. How many years does a President serve per term? How many terms can a President serve? Who is third inline to the Presidency? What is the name of the system used in U.S. Presidential elections? Etc.

 

[Picaro]

Actually it would do away with 75% of the Democratic Party's base, which is why Democrats would oppose such a requirement.

That would depend greatly on how much power the Democrats have over the manner in which such a requirement is crafted and applied. This is exactly the point—the “literacy tests” of old were specifically crafted and applied to disenfranchise that those in charge of these tests wanted to prevent from voting, exactly as the Democrats would do with any such test of they were allowed to apply it today.

In a state such as California, which is thoroughly ruled by hopelessly-corrupt Democrats, do you really believe that any “civics test” imposed as a condition of voting would not be blatantly crafted and applied in order to disenfranchise Republican/conservative voters?

If they craft a civics test like the one used to become a U.S. citizen how the fuck are they going to make it so that people of only one political party can pass it??? It would be simple shit like name the three branches of the federal government. How many years does a President serve per term? How many terms can a President serve? Who is third inline to the Presidency? What is the name of the system used in U.S. Presidential elections? Etc.

That's the sort of tests I have in mind, and it would be hard for leftists or rightists to disagree with that, but they will anyway, since The Stupid Vote is the most valued in this country's elections. We can thank Aaron Burr for that; he came up with the 'bindle voting' idea when supporting Jefferson's elections to VP and Prez, setting in motion the trend to Tammany Hall and machine politics.

 

[MarathonMike]

The test would have to be dumbed down to the meaningless level to get more than 10% of the population to pass it.

I have no problem with a low voter turnout as long as it is informed voter turnout.

 

[boedicca]

I find myself in the rare position of agreeing with Jillian.

One problem is test design, and another is test administration. I can see this turning quite quickly into a test of ideological purity to be able to vote.

We should go back to teaching civics, as well as the histories of America and West Civilization so that voters understand the philosophical foundations and prices paid to come up with the system to preserve our liberty.

Well, that argument is simplistic; if we're not going to do anything because of possible 'corruption', then there is no point in having laws, government, hospitals, roads, or anything else, because all of those can be 'corrupted' too. We should just rely on anarchy and Darwinism and not even bother with voting at all.

It's quite grounded in present day reality. Progs control almost all public education. They oppose the Electoral College, Federalism and other aspects of our Constitutional Republic which thwart their ability to control the rest of us. They go especially bonkers when they lose. Witness the unhinged hysteria about Kavanaugh and their attempts to smear and delegitimize him. I'd rather not have people like that decide what Civics to teach and what tests to design. As Progs promote Big Government, they are firmly entrenched in the bureaucracy and would have ample opportunity to design and enforce ideological purity via a civics test requirement to vote.

If you think that is not possible, take a look at what is going on on Google, FB and Twitter these days. Consider the suppression of conservative viewpoints a preview of coming Prog attractions.

And all of those are being exposed, and aren't supported by the public; if the public doesn't care, and doesn't change it, then the whole issue is moot anyway. Things get that way precisely because the stupid, illiterate, and uninformed were allowed to vote. You also over-estimate how long the current status quo is going to be allowed to operate.

Ah. Are you suggesting that some sort of Anointed Elite is going to save the Deplorables from themselves?

What? Passing a basic civics test makes one an 'Anointed Elite'? You must live in California.

If passing basic civics tests makes one an 'Elite' in this country, it's best that nobody be allowed to vote, actually. The masses are indeed too stupid to be given such a responsibility.

You are missing the point, either intentionally or not (my bet is on the latter).

The issue is Who defines the curriculum for Civics classes, Who designs the Test, and Who oversees the testing process. I don't trust the Federal Government to do this for the glaringly obvious reasons demonstrated by The Obabble Embed Resistance.

As your attitude towards Normal People aligns with The Prog-Resistance-Big Government-Self-Anointed-Elite, I totally grok why you want Normal People to be denied the right to vote.

 

[yiostheoy]

Just like the title says... do you think voters should prove they understand how the government and voting process works in order to be eligible to vote? It's not something I necessarily agree on, but watching some members on this forum that have no idea how some parts of the government works, or know some of the laws has got me wondering if they understand what they are doing when they get in the voting booth.

Do you know how to spell u-n-c-o-n-s-t-i-t-u-t-i-o-n-a-l ??