Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 112
  1. #21  
    Best Bounty Hunter in the Forums fettpett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southwest Michigan (in Exile)
    Posts
    8,757
    if anything, just repeal the 26th amendment an raise it back to 21, but i don't see it happening. Preregistering and showing ID is the way to go
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Best Bounty Hunter in the Forums fettpett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southwest Michigan (in Exile)
    Posts
    8,757
    Quote Originally Posted by jnkbortka View Post
    i'm actualy considering the airforce :D



    but shouldn't they have the option? there are many people who can vote that don't.
    nah, 18 is the lowest it should go
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,269
    The idea of an 18 year old voting is asinine. But we'll never get that genie back in the bottle.:mad:

    You ought to be 21 and own property. Or have owned property in the past.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    You people do realize that things like poll quizzes, property requirements, and the rest was done in the past as a way to disenfranchise minority and poor voters. It's funny how gleefully everyone here loves that idea.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    Best Bounty Hunter in the Forums fettpett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southwest Michigan (in Exile)
    Posts
    8,757
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    You people do realize that things like poll quizzes, property requirements, and the rest was done in the past as a way to disenfranchise minority and poor voters. It's funny how gleefully everyone here loves that idea.
    no they were only given to certain people, not everyone equally, that is what they are talking about, in order to vote everyone would have to take a quiz.

    property i don't particularly agree with
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    How about instead of doing elections, we go with the Supreme Court's definition of speech and just say that whichever candidate raises the most money wins. Each election the candidates will simply do a fundraising campaign and whoever rakes in the most billions becomes POTUS.

    We're almost there already, why not?
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Senior Member jnkbortka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Salem, Indiana
    Posts
    380
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    You people do realize that things like poll quizzes, property requirements, and the rest was done in the past as a way to disenfranchise minority and poor voters. It's funny how gleefully everyone here loves that idea.
    I think the poll quiz is an excellent idea. why not just make the quiz naming the bill of rights? property requirements are not such a good idea though.

    Quote Originally Posted by TruckerMe View Post
    The idea of an 18 year old voting is asinine. But we'll never get that genie back in the bottle.:mad:

    You ought to be 21 and own property. Or have owned property in the past.
    I disagree. as with any age group, there will always be a group of stupid people. I'm sure there are plenty of people over the age of 21 that voted for Obama, no? this is why you institute the quiz requirement, so intelligent people, of any age can vote, and ghetto/trailer trash welfare whores can't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    How about instead of doing elections, we go with the Supreme Court's definition of speech and just say that whichever candidate raises the most money wins. Each election the candidates will simply do a fundraising campaign and whoever rakes in the most billions becomes POTUS.

    We're almost there already, why not?
    this is why we only let the INTELLIGENT people vote, who look past this, and who know the bill of rights and what its all about.
    Last edited by jnkbortka; 04-12-2011 at 11:48 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Senior Member Rebel Yell's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    South GA
    Posts
    5,181
    If you pay taxes, you vote,

    If you haven't paid taxes in the last 2 years, you don't.
    I feel that once a black fella has referred to white foks as "honky paleface devil white-trash cracker redneck Caspers," he's abdicated the right to get upset about the "N" word. But that's just me. -- Jim Goad
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    Senior Member txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,826
    this is why we only let the INTELLIGENT people vote, who look past this, and who know the bill of rights and what its all about.
    If that were truly the case n00b...Obama wouldn't be the President today.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #30  
    Senior Member Zathras's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    San Jose, California
    Posts
    6,288
    Quote Originally Posted by KhrushchevsShoe View Post
    The only good thing about 16 years olds being able to vote is that a tiny fraction of them would even bother doing it.
    But then again you could finaly vote...no, wait...you would still need to wait 4 years if the voting age was 16.
    Solve a man's problem with violence and help him for a day. Teach a man how to solve his problems with violence, help him for a lifetime - Belkar Bitterleaf
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •