Wayne Stollings wrote:
Some should not. The inability to apply doesn't detract from it being a good idea.
Some do not vote as their choice, but telling someone they should not vote instead of telling them to take a little time to learn and then vote is wrong, IMO.
I don't think anyone is against having folks learn before voting. However, if you're not going to verify whether or not they did, there's little point in telling
them to do so.
Just as there would be little point in telling teenagers to have safe sex without being able to verify they do or do not?
I wonder sometimes just how important education is when we allow the poorest, most uneducated and uninformed individuals vote because, well, it's their right.
Given those people are electing more educated and more informed individuals, or should be, this situation is somewhat covered by a representative democracy. If it were a pure democracy it would be a worse problem.
The problem with the impact on the elections has always been that they become more of a popularity contest. The representatives have mutated to the point they are nearly always playing to the next election.
The concept of a poll tax or poll test does not eliminate this issue, but allows one group a better chance of controlling whether another group can vote. A very slippery slope to me.
The MS delta is a prime example of what happens when that is allowed to go on for generations.
That's what my education has led me to believe, and it isn't too shabby.
I had to fire a woman with a PhD in molecular biology a few years ago, partly because she was the most clueless person I have ever known with such a high level of education. I would not have trusted her to vote intelligently in any election, but I would never suggest that she not vote if she were going to.
Knowing and still not participating is worse, IMO.
one knows something and voting might be a close second.
But what if we are not as knowledgable as we think we are?
We could only think we know, but do not. Mental operations are very confusing to some who "know" a different reality. My grandmother, for example, "knew" she was living in the late 1940s for a few years prior to her death. Reality may be more relative than we know.
It is like telling kids they are wasting resources by going to school so they should drop out and get a job ... the "easy" solution that may cause some to be lost to the system that could use them.
Alright, then how far do you go in attempting to turn them around? If you can't show that the gains are worth the resources put in or more, you are
wasting your time and resources. No need to sugar coat it.
But things change and people change even more. If you have ever watched the "Rocket City Rednecks" show, the one guy living in the trailer working at a low level job supposedly has the highest IQ of anyone there including the ones working for NASA.