Do too many people vote?

[rtw1997]

The subject of voting rights never fails to come up during election season, at least here in the US, and so in light of that, I was wondering what people think about this.
Personally, I believe that far too many people vote. We laud voting and are constantly reminded that it is a "civic duty," but isn't it a perverse practice to encourage masses of uneducated, uninformed, and generally apathetic people to vote on candidates and issues about whom/which they know nothing?
Majorities of Americans cannot name even one Supreme Court justice, or correctly answer basic questions about the economy and American history. Perhaps we should institute a civic knowledge test of sorts, and only allow people who score above a certain level to vote. I know it sounds harsh, but for the good of the country, we can't continue to let clueless voters influenced solely by pop culture determine the fate of our republic.

[Typhlosion]

That's the same argument I hear in Brazil because voting, here, is mandatory.

I don't see why we should have to apply any test to allow someone to have a say in their own society. I'm not sure if I even agree on being literate as a minimum.

[Skitty]

When I first read the title, I was a little apprehensive, but you do make some fair points. Obviously this problem is partially solved by the electoral collage, at least in the case of the presidency, but for smaller offices I definitely think far too many uneducated people vote. However, that is just an unfortunate consequence of democracy. It would be impossible to put a sort of test in place because people choose their candidates for a plethora of reasons that may not even be related to politics (which isn't necessarily a bad thing), but that is the only way to ensure freedom at the ballots.

[Vlerchan]

No. Voter turnout rarely tops 60% of all eligibles. The recent mid-terms were particularly dismal.

Voter turnout in last week's midterm elections was terrible. How terrible? Just 36.3 percent of eligible voters cast votes — the worst turnout in 72 years, the New York Times reports. Only the 1942 election (33.9 percent) had a lower rate of voter turnout.

http://news.yahoo.com/voter-turnout-2014-midterms-worst-in-72-years-143406756.html

It doesn't matter anyway though since studies show (http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf) that the US political establishment doesn't really care what the voterbase thinks anyway.

[CosmicNoodle]

The subject of voting rights never fails to come up during election season, at least here in the US, and so in light of that, I was wondering what people think about this.
Personally, I believe that far too many people vote. We laud voting and are constantly reminded that it is a "civic duty," but isn't it a perverse practice to encourage masses of uneducated, uninformed, and generally apathetic people to vote on candidates and issues about whom/which they know nothing?
Majorities of Americans cannot name even one Supreme Court justice, or correctly answer basic questions about the economy and American history. Perhaps we should institute a civic knowledge test of sorts, and only allow people who score above a certain level to vote. I know it sounds harsh, but for the good of the country, we can't continue to let clueless voters influenced solely by pop culture determine the fate of our republic.

On some level I agree, and on some level I think that's the worlds douce baggyist thing you an do.
True, some people are nothing more than vapid, clueless, stupid morons who don't know there arse from there elbow, let alone conservatives from liberals.
But on the other hand, as stupid as they may be, the political decision will still affect them, so they should have some say in it.

I'm gonna' go solely off logic here. The political party in power affects EVERYONE, so EVERYONE should get to vote. (so long as your an adult, obviously)

[Miserabilia]

Think of a country like India. Indian political parties are represented by simple symbols, which is because a large percentage of their voters is illiterate, but these people still make out an important part of the population.

[ImCoolBeans]

Voter turn out is horrible in the U.S. If anything far too few people vote. People always complain about the outcomes of elections but the vast majority don't even participate.

My brother is 36 years old and has never even been registered to vote. He enjoys talking about politics and has mostly intelligent things to say, but I can hardly even have a discussion with him on the subject because he has never voted, yet thinks that his voice deserves to be heard. It's almost a paradox.

[normalperson]

oh man here in Canada on average voter turn out is less then 50% at it's lowest i think it was 37% especially for provincial elections so i guess it all depends what country you live in. but here no

[mrmee]

I dont think it matters one way or another how many people vote. The electoral college just elects whoever they want, regardless of the people theyre supposed to be representing's votes.
To be honest, i really dont care who gets elected. Ill probably hate them for sitting on their throne of power and taking my money anyway. Nothing they do is going to affect me in the slightest, except if they declare war and impose a draft. I can feel your disapproving essence already. Let the bitching commence.

[phuckphace]

Voter turn out is horrible in the U.S. If anything far too few people vote. People always complain about the outcomes of elections but the vast majority don't even participate.

My brother is 36 years old and has never even been registered to vote. He enjoys talking about politics and has mostly intelligent things to say, but I can hardly even have a discussion with him on the subject because he has never voted, yet thinks that his voice deserves to be heard. It's almost a paradox.

there is no paradox. 100% of eligible voters could vote but under the current status quo it's still a waste of time. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobson%27s_choice) that's why the most politically informed will usually choose not to vote - once you've figured out that the whole democracy thing is just an elaborate folk pageant, you probably won't be in the biggest hurry to line up at the polls.

[jordanhardy]

On some level I agree, and on some level I think that's the worlds douce baggyist thing you an do.
True, some people are nothing more than vapid, clueless, stupid morons who don't know there arse from there elbow, let alone conservatives from liberals.
But on the other hand, as stupid as they may be, the political decision will still affect them, so they should have some say in it.

I'm gonna' go solely off logic here. The political party in power affects EVERYONE, so EVERYONE should get to vote. (so long as your an adult, obviously)

I agree! Everyone should be allowed to vote as the decisions made by those elected in will effect them too. What was the point of fighting hard for the ability to allow everyone to vote if we're not going to do it.

Who would make the decision of the could vote or not and who says that their decision is right? How would you determine that a person is able? Just because some people arn't up to scratch with all the political arguments, it doesn't mean that they shoulnt be allowed to vote. By restricting the democratic process, puts a halt on change and the eviction of a nation as a whole. If those in charge allow the votes to be blocked or restrict those voting, them what else could they change, would they stop at that? It wouldn't happen and wouldn't be a good idea as it would only be a very large step backwards.

[James Dean]

Not enough people vote IMO. If more people voted, politics could become less boring. Coming from a somewhat unpatriotic person. Or at least more younger urban politicians need to arise. More minority politicians, more female politicians. More gay politicians. My personal opinion as well.

[phuckphace]

Not enough people vote IMO. If more people voted, politics could become less boring. Coming from a somewhat unpatriotic person. Or at least more younger urban politicians need to arise. More minority politicians, more female politicians. More gay politicians. My personal opinion as well.

bad idea. multiculturalism and politics don't mix. whenever minorities (immigrants) acquire political power, they use it to re-jig the establishment in ways that benefit them, but at the expense of the native populace. a home-away-from-home, you could say. Hispanic politicians are already doing this - they roleplay as Americans long enough to get into office, but once they do they start lobbying for rights and handouts for their buddies sneaking across the border. an immigrant's true loyalty is always to his native country and culture, while the US, our country, is just a magic ATM that prints pesos.

tl;dr if it's political representation they want, I hear Mexico is holding elections too.

[cbm89031]

I am not old enough to vote yet

[Canadian Dream]

First, when I saw the thread title, I seriously thought I was gonna write a rant about it, but I can see your point - there are too many people that vote without knowing what the consequences on others and themselves have. If people actually gave some thought before voting, you guys would really have a different country there. Here in Canada, though, we have the opposite problem - nobody votes except for a bunch of elderly people.

[phuckphace]

The Square Wheels of Ochlocracy or, How I Learned To Stop Voting and Hail the Emperor

[Taryn98]

I don't think too many people vote in general, but there's too many uninformed/uneducated people out there who shouldn't be allowed to vote. So many people see the D or R and just vote based on that. I think that's terrible.
Everyone should be required to take a test showing they know what the issues are and what candidates positions are on those issues before you can vote for them.