NSFW THE TRUMPOCALYPSE

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh, I'd take Bush over Hatch, any day. I think that GWB was manipulated, and he has realized it.

I think the man was dumb as a rock and not terribly good at anything. The people the GOP surrounded him with were the real issue there.

I'm worried we're going to see an even more malicious, even more intense version of that this next term.
 
It does seem that a (or even the) basic problem with democracy is that stupid people get the same vote as intelligent ones. It is very difficult to see how to get past this issue but I think it's worth starting a conversation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy_T
It does seem that a (or even the) basic problem with democracy is that stupid people get the same vote as intelligent ones. It is very difficult to see how to get past this issue but I think it's worth starting a conversation.
The problem is that people can be intelligent in one or more regards, and extremely stupid in others.

Ben Carson, one of the GOP candidates in this past election season, is a prime example of this. He's a gifted neurosurgeon, but an absolute fool with respect to pretty much everything else.

Having some kind of intelligence/knowledge/educational litmus test for voting would be impossible, and further subject to all kinds of abuse. It was used in the American South for many decades, to keep black people from voting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KLS52
It does seem that a (or even the) basic problem with democracy is that stupid people get the same vote as intelligent ones. It is very difficult to see how to get past this issue but I think it's worth starting a conversation.
Let's just go back to white male Christian landowners as the only ones with voting rights!


Not. Who is going to pick and choose who can and cannot vote? People on VV? :D
 
Let's just go back to white male Christian landowners as the only ones with voting rights!


Not. Who is going to pick and choose who can and cannot vote? People on VV? :D
I believe we'd have Bernie! ;)
 
Carson's not intelligent, but it's certainly true there are gifted scientists with an IQ of well above average that would do very well on maths or english or logical reasoning tests but whose opinions on ethical issues were no smarter than the average man in the street.

I'm not suggesting voting rights should be based on intelligence, however. I'm just wondering if there is some way to create a better system so we can stop electing idiots, demagogues, and liars and retain a right of everyone to vote. The idea is to suppress the power of low-intelligence voters indirectly. Whatever new system were in place would perhaps have to be voted in by a referendum of everyone.

It might be possible to create some test for the candidates themselves, that you need x years of political experience to run for President, or you have to pass some basic tests of morality or intelligence to run. Or that you need a certain amount of endorsements from a select pool of people in society (other top politicians, judges, top academics, top businessmen?).

Or perhaps some system where the mass public vote accounts for less than 100% of the vote, but is combined with a vote some type of qualified professionals to produce some total.

How about this: to have the right to vote - you have to pass an online test asking questions about your country, your voting system, and other things. The test would not be hard, but you would have to be willing to spend a few hours reading some materials in order to pass, that could eliminate a certain portion of dumb or lazy people who couldn't be bothered. People that failed the test could be given other opportunties to study and pass it. This could be done online, or in the form of a compulsory college education evening class for citizens.

Similary, for each election, everyone that wanted to vote could be required to read a long document summarizing all the candidates and their views and that having to carry out an online test to see that they really read it which if they pass they then get the right to vote. This might eliminate some people that vote without knowing what they are doing.

If Trump starts a nuclear war with China because he's an idiot, then everyone would look back with the benefit of hindsight and ask how we let it happen and what we could have done differently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Second Summer
The hard-right views of David M. Friedman have drawn polarized responses in the aftermath of his selection by President-elect Donald J. Trump as the next United States ambassador to Israel.

Mr. Friedman, a bankruptcy lawyer who has represented Mr. Trump in matters involving Atlantic City casinos, has no diplomatic experience. He has long espoused hard-right, pro-Israel views that are often at odds with decades of United States policy toward the region.

He doubts the need for a two-state solution; endorses continued settlements in Palestinian territory and even the annexation of parts of the occupied West Bank; has accused the Obama administration of anti-Semitism; and once likened left-leaning Jewish critics to Nazi collaborators.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/16/w...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
 
Carson's not intelligent, but it's certainly true there are gifted scientists with an IQ of well above average that would do very well on maths or english or logical reasoning tests but whose opinions on ethical issues were no smarter than the average man in the street.

I'm not suggesting voting rights should be based on intelligence, however. I'm just wondering if there is some way to create a better system so we can stop electing idiots, demagogues, and liars and retain a right of everyone to vote. The idea is to suppress the power of low-intelligence voters indirectly. Whatever new system were in place would perhaps have to be voted in by a referendum of everyone.

It might be possible to create some test for the candidates themselves, that you need x years of political experience to run for President, or you have to pass some basic tests of morality or intelligence to run. Or that you need a certain amount of endorsements from a select pool of people in society (other top politicians, judges, top academics, top businessmen?).

Or perhaps some system where the mass public vote accounts for less than 100% of the vote, but is combined with a vote some type of qualified professionals to produce some total.

How about this: to have the right to vote - you have to pass an online test asking questions about your country, your voting system, and other things. The test would not be hard, but you would have to be willing to spend a few hours reading some materials in order to pass, that could eliminate a certain portion of dumb or lazy people who couldn't be bothered. People that failed the test could be given other opportunties to study and pass it. This could be done online, or in the form of a compulsory college education evening class for citizens.

Similary, for each election, everyone that wanted to vote could be required to read a long document summarizing all the candidates and their views and that having to carry out an online test to see that they really read it which if they pass they then get the right to vote. This might eliminate some people that vote without knowing what they are doing.

If Trump starts a nuclear war with China because he's an idiot, then everyone would look back with the benefit of hindsight and ask how we let it happen and what we could have done differently.
This would not be fair to people whose first language is not English, foreven if they translated the test into 1000 languages, each would be slightly different after translation. And what about test bias? An elitist voter base would not serve the very people who need good governmental representation the most. Imo. Let the public vote!
 
What's really sad, is that the joke can be validly recycled for a number of different Republican Presidents.

I've heard a similar version where Hillary jumped without a parachute. So I guess it can be recycled for Democrats too.
 
I've heard a similar version where Hillary jumped without a parachute. So I guess it can be recycled for Democrats too.

It would have to be modified for anyone other than Trump, because he's the only candidate who has ever (to my knowledge) described himself in such glowing terms.
 
Most are still cheering, even when Trump admits he was only saying things to get elected, but a few lose their smiles as they realize what he's saying. :lol:

 
  • Like
Reactions: beancounter
This would not be fair to people whose first language is not English, foreven if they translated the test into 1000 languages, each would be slightly different after translation. And what about test bias? An elitist voter base would not serve the very people who need good governmental representation the most. Imo. Let the public vote!

Agreed. However well-intentioned it may be, it's that kind of thinking that led to the creation of the electoral college, which keeps massively screwing us over.

There's no truly right way to do democracy, or hell, just government in general. Direct is the only thing that makes sense. The good with the bad, as it may be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.