Total Posts:126|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Is mandatory voting a good idea?

Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 5:02:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I'd like to read some input on this topic of mandatory voting (e.g. pros/cons, history, functions, etc..)

Pros: higher voter turn out, strengthens democracy, increased application of civic duty

Cons: uninformed voters, decreased genuine representation of population, higher polling costs

Would compulsory voting in general elections, presidential elections, primary elections, local elections, propositions, and referendums be beneficial or detrimental?
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 5:09:25 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I have thought about it in the past and tbh I'm undecided. It would be good since not enough people vote now as it is, but having mandatory voting would also mean apathetic people would cast uneducated votes... Imo, not voting at all is better than making uneducated votes.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 5:16:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
No. If people choose not to vote they made the choice. If they made the bad choice to not vote, then why would their forced vote be any better?

It might actually have a worse outcome. People not politically aware who normally wouldn't vote would vote for crap.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 5:18:50 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 5:16:52 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
No. If people choose not to vote they made the choice. If they made the bad choice to not vote, then why would their forced vote be any better?

It might actually have a worse outcome. People not politically aware who normally wouldn't vote would vote for crap.

Australia has mandatory voting. I'm not sure how happy the general public is with the election outcomes though.
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 5:27:57 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I agree with both of you. Even with voting being voluntary, we have some of the most incompetent candidates receiving votes. Even when they are clearly and utterly lying to the voters, disregarding all cognitive dissonance to appeal to a specific group, or deliberately harming America, many candidates receive vast amounts of votes. When Mitt Romney wins a Primary election and Newt Gingrich is still in the running, you know the public is uneducated; and that's those motivated enough to participate. Extrapolate that to the most apathetic cretin of which you can think.

lol I should change this topic to, "Are IQ requirements prior to voting a good idea?"
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 5:29:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 5:27:57 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
I agree with both of you. Even with voting being voluntary, we have some of the most incompetent candidates receiving votes. Even when they are clearly and utterly lying to the voters, disregarding all cognitive dissonance to appeal to a specific group, or deliberately harming America, many candidates receive vast amounts of votes. When Mitt Romney wins a Primary election and Newt Gingrich is still in the running, you know the public is uneducated; and that's those motivated enough to participate. Extrapolate that to the most apathetic cretin of which you can think.

lol I should change this topic to, "Are IQ requirements prior to voting a good idea?"

Requiring IQ tests for voting could be a slippery slope imo.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:20:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.

A general knowledge test can be studied for. IQ tests cannot. IQ tests measure the general aptitude of the person.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
vmpire321
Posts: 4,731
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:32:46 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:20:14 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.

A general knowledge test can be studied for. IQ tests cannot. IQ tests measure the general aptitude of the person.

Mhm. I'm seeing a big trend in my friends - they aren't really politically involved, but when Wikipedia and a couple websites the frequent protested, they started screaming murder at SOPA. Apparently, they thought that SOPA was closing down the internet. We need tests to keep out a stupid mob rule.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:34:05 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:32:46 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:20:14 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.

A general knowledge test can be studied for. IQ tests cannot. IQ tests measure the general aptitude of the person.

Mhm. I'm seeing a big trend in my friends - they aren't really politically involved, but when Wikipedia and a couple websites the frequent protested, they started screaming murder at SOPA. Apparently, they thought that SOPA was closing down the internet. We need tests to keep out a stupid mob rule.

Democracy: The God that Failed. People cannot effectively rule sh!t.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:36:58 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:32:46 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:20:14 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.

A general knowledge test can be studied for. IQ tests cannot. IQ tests measure the general aptitude of the person.

Mhm. I'm seeing a big trend in my friends - they aren't really politically involved, but when Wikipedia and a couple websites the frequent protested, they started screaming murder at SOPA. Apparently, they thought that SOPA was closing down the internet. We need tests to keep out a stupid mob rule.

The problem is IQ doesn't measure how rational a person is.
vmpire321
Posts: 4,731
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:38:47 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:36:58 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:32:46 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:20:14 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.

A general knowledge test can be studied for. IQ tests cannot. IQ tests measure the general aptitude of the person.

Mhm. I'm seeing a big trend in my friends - they aren't really politically involved, but when Wikipedia and a couple websites the frequent protested, they started screaming murder at SOPA. Apparently, they thought that SOPA was closing down the internet. We need tests to keep out a stupid mob rule.

The problem is IQ doesn't measure how rational a person is.

Meh. I doubt that many smart people will be irrational.
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:42:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:38:47 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:36:58 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:32:46 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:20:14 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.

A general knowledge test can be studied for. IQ tests cannot. IQ tests measure the general aptitude of the person.

Mhm. I'm seeing a big trend in my friends - they aren't really politically involved, but when Wikipedia and a couple websites the frequent protested, they started screaming murder at SOPA. Apparently, they thought that SOPA was closing down the internet. We need tests to keep out a stupid mob rule.

The problem is IQ doesn't measure how rational a person is.

Meh. I doubt that many smart people will be irrational.

Many smart people are very irrational and out of touch with reality. Idk what LK's IQ is, but he's a totalitarian, and he's probably done more political reading then a lot of my friends. I had a debate with DanT (IQ of 148) who honestly believes that everyone in this country has equal opportunity. A lot of very intelligent people can be clueless to how things are in real life.
vmpire321
Posts: 4,731
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:48:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:42:43 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:38:47 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:36:58 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:32:46 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:20:14 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.

A general knowledge test can be studied for. IQ tests cannot. IQ tests measure the general aptitude of the person.

Mhm. I'm seeing a big trend in my friends - they aren't really politically involved, but when Wikipedia and a couple websites the frequent protested, they started screaming murder at SOPA. Apparently, they thought that SOPA was closing down the internet. We need tests to keep out a stupid mob rule.

The problem is IQ doesn't measure how rational a person is.

Meh. I doubt that many smart people will be irrational.

Many smart people are very irrational and out of touch with reality. Idk what LK's IQ is, but he's a totalitarian, and he's probably done more political reading then a lot of my friends. I had a debate with DanT (IQ of 148) who honestly believes that everyone in this country has equal opportunity. A lot of very intelligent people can be clueless to how things are in real life.

Then perhaps a test on big issues too?
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:48:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:42:43 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:38:47 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:36:58 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:32:46 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:20:14 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.

A general knowledge test can be studied for. IQ tests cannot. IQ tests measure the general aptitude of the person.

Mhm. I'm seeing a big trend in my friends - they aren't really politically involved, but when Wikipedia and a couple websites the frequent protested, they started screaming murder at SOPA. Apparently, they thought that SOPA was closing down the internet. We need tests to keep out a stupid mob rule.

The problem is IQ doesn't measure how rational a person is.

Meh. I doubt that many smart people will be irrational.

Many smart people are very irrational and out of touch with reality. Idk what LK's IQ is, but he's a totalitarian, and he's probably done more political reading then a lot of my friends. I had a debate with DanT (IQ of 148) who honestly believes that everyone in this country has equal opportunity. A lot of very intelligent people can be clueless to how things are in real life.

So a person's rationality is determined on how much you like their beliefs? Why is totalitarianism necessarily irrational?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
vmpire321
Posts: 4,731
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:50:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:48:55 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:42:43 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:38:47 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:36:58 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:32:46 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:20:14 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.

A general knowledge test can be studied for. IQ tests cannot. IQ tests measure the general aptitude of the person.

Mhm. I'm seeing a big trend in my friends - they aren't really politically involved, but when Wikipedia and a couple websites the frequent protested, they started screaming murder at SOPA. Apparently, they thought that SOPA was closing down the internet. We need tests to keep out a stupid mob rule.

The problem is IQ doesn't measure how rational a person is.

Meh. I doubt that many smart people will be irrational.

Many smart people are very irrational and out of touch with reality. Idk what LK's IQ is, but he's a totalitarian, and he's probably done more political reading then a lot of my friends. I had a debate with DanT (IQ of 148) who honestly believes that everyone in this country has equal opportunity. A lot of very intelligent people can be clueless to how things are in real life.

So a person's rationality is determined on how much you like their beliefs? Why is totalitarianism necessarily irrational?

or perhaps thinking that we all have a equal opportunity?
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:51:57 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:48:55 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:42:43 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:38:47 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:36:58 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:32:46 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:20:14 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.

A general knowledge test can be studied for. IQ tests cannot. IQ tests measure the general aptitude of the person.

Mhm. I'm seeing a big trend in my friends - they aren't really politically involved, but when Wikipedia and a couple websites the frequent protested, they started screaming murder at SOPA. Apparently, they thought that SOPA was closing down the internet. We need tests to keep out a stupid mob rule.

The problem is IQ doesn't measure how rational a person is.

Meh. I doubt that many smart people will be irrational.

Many smart people are very irrational and out of touch with reality. Idk what LK's IQ is, but he's a totalitarian, and he's probably done more political reading then a lot of my friends. I had a debate with DanT (IQ of 148) who honestly believes that everyone in this country has equal opportunity. A lot of very intelligent people can be clueless to how things are in real life.

So a person's rationality is determined on how much you like their beliefs? Why is totalitarianism necessarily irrational?

I have to draw the line somewhere. Totalitarianism places your entire well being in the hands of one person who can do whatever he likes with it. I'd be happy to debate the resolution that support for totalitarianism is irrational.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:53:23 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:51:57 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:48:55 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:42:43 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:38:47 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:36:58 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:32:46 AM, vmpire321 wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:20:14 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.

A general knowledge test can be studied for. IQ tests cannot. IQ tests measure the general aptitude of the person.

Mhm. I'm seeing a big trend in my friends - they aren't really politically involved, but when Wikipedia and a couple websites the frequent protested, they started screaming murder at SOPA. Apparently, they thought that SOPA was closing down the internet. We need tests to keep out a stupid mob rule.

The problem is IQ doesn't measure how rational a person is.

Meh. I doubt that many smart people will be irrational.

Many smart people are very irrational and out of touch with reality. Idk what LK's IQ is, but he's a totalitarian, and he's probably done more political reading then a lot of my friends. I had a debate with DanT (IQ of 148) who honestly believes that everyone in this country has equal opportunity. A lot of very intelligent people can be clueless to how things are in real life.

So a person's rationality is determined on how much you like their beliefs? Why is totalitarianism necessarily irrational?

I have to draw the line somewhere. Totalitarianism places your entire well being in the hands of one person who can do whatever he likes with it. I'd be happy to debate the resolution that support for totalitarianism is irrational.

I wouldn't want to debate whether it is rational, but we can debate sometime in the future the resolution of totalitarianism vs democracy.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:56:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I wouldn't want to debate whether it is rational, but we can debate sometime in the future the resolution of totalitarianism vs democracy.

I'd be happy to even as I expect you'll draw every one of your arguments out of 'Democracy: The God that Failed.'

Then perhaps a test on big issues too?

This would be more plausible than an IQ test, at least on first look.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 10:58:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:56:41 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I wouldn't want to debate whether it is rational, but we can debate sometime in the future the resolution of totalitarianism vs democracy.

I'd be happy to even as I expect you'll draw every one of your arguments out of 'Democracy: The God that Failed.'

Then perhaps a test on big issues too?

This would be more plausible than an IQ test, at least on first look.

You do realize the reason that they are called "Big Issues" is because there is no concrete answer to them. They are highly controversial. That's like testing somebody on the merits of Creationism with no chance to mention Evolution.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 11:01:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:58:31 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:56:41 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I wouldn't want to debate whether it is rational, but we can debate sometime in the future the resolution of totalitarianism vs democracy.

I'd be happy to even as I expect you'll draw every one of your arguments out of 'Democracy: The God that Failed.'

Then perhaps a test on big issues too?

This would be more plausible than an IQ test, at least on first look.

You do realize the reason that they are called "Big Issues" is because there is no concrete answer to them. They are highly controversial. That's like testing somebody on the merits of Creationism with no chance to mention Evolution.

There are facts about the "Big Issues." That said, I don't know whether a short test on this subject would be practical or even worthwhile, not to mention politically biased.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 11:02:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 11:01:35 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:58:31 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:56:41 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I wouldn't want to debate whether it is rational, but we can debate sometime in the future the resolution of totalitarianism vs democracy.

I'd be happy to even as I expect you'll draw every one of your arguments out of 'Democracy: The God that Failed.'

Then perhaps a test on big issues too?

This would be more plausible than an IQ test, at least on first look.

You do realize the reason that they are called "Big Issues" is because there is no concrete answer to them. They are highly controversial. That's like testing somebody on the merits of Creationism with no chance to mention Evolution.

There are facts about the "Big Issues." That said, I don't know whether a short test on this subject would be practical or even worthwhile, not to mention politically biased.

These so called facts are also controversial. I can say it's a fact that life begins at conception. You can say it is a fact that it does not.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 11:05:00 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 11:02:54 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 11:01:35 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:58:31 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:56:41 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I wouldn't want to debate whether it is rational, but we can debate sometime in the future the resolution of totalitarianism vs democracy.

I'd be happy to even as I expect you'll draw every one of your arguments out of 'Democracy: The God that Failed.'

Then perhaps a test on big issues too?

This would be more plausible than an IQ test, at least on first look.

You do realize the reason that they are called "Big Issues" is because there is no concrete answer to them. They are highly controversial. That's like testing somebody on the merits of Creationism with no chance to mention Evolution.

There are facts about the "Big Issues." That said, I don't know whether a short test on this subject would be practical or even worthwhile, not to mention politically biased.

These so called facts are also controversial. I can say it's a fact that life begins at conception. You can say it is a fact that it does not.

Facts do exist in politics. Which candidate supports which policy, historical events, etc.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 11:08:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 11:05:00 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 11:02:54 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 11:01:35 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:58:31 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:56:41 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I wouldn't want to debate whether it is rational, but we can debate sometime in the future the resolution of totalitarianism vs democracy.

I'd be happy to even as I expect you'll draw every one of your arguments out of 'Democracy: The God that Failed.'

Then perhaps a test on big issues too?

This would be more plausible than an IQ test, at least on first look.

You do realize the reason that they are called "Big Issues" is because there is no concrete answer to them. They are highly controversial. That's like testing somebody on the merits of Creationism with no chance to mention Evolution.

There are facts about the "Big Issues." That said, I don't know whether a short test on this subject would be practical or even worthwhile, not to mention politically biased.

These so called facts are also controversial. I can say it's a fact that life begins at conception. You can say it is a fact that it does not.

Facts do exist in politics. Which candidate supports which policy, historical events, etc.

That's not big issues. By big issues I thought you meant abortion, border fence, etc....
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 11:10:46 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 5:02:31 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
I'd like to read some input on this topic of mandatory voting (e.g. pros/cons, history, functions, etc..)

Pros: higher voter turn out, strengthens democracy, increased application of civic duty

Cons: uninformed voters, decreased genuine representation of population, higher polling costs

Uninformed voters is already a major problem, why would we want to increase that number.

Plus what would the penalty be? You really want to arrest, or fine people for not giving a uninformed vote?
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 11:12:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 11:08:45 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 11:05:00 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 11:02:54 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 11:01:35 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:58:31 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:56:41 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I wouldn't want to debate whether it is rational, but we can debate sometime in the future the resolution of totalitarianism vs democracy.

I'd be happy to even as I expect you'll draw every one of your arguments out of 'Democracy: The God that Failed.'

Then perhaps a test on big issues too?

This would be more plausible than an IQ test, at least on first look.

You do realize the reason that they are called "Big Issues" is because there is no concrete answer to them. They are highly controversial. That's like testing somebody on the merits of Creationism with no chance to mention Evolution.

There are facts about the "Big Issues." That said, I don't know whether a short test on this subject would be practical or even worthwhile, not to mention politically biased.

These so called facts are also controversial. I can say it's a fact that life begins at conception. You can say it is a fact that it does not.

Facts do exist in politics. Which candidate supports which policy, historical events, etc.

That's not big issues. By big issues I thought you meant abortion, border fence, etc....

That's not what I meant.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 11:13:02 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 5:29:33 AM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 1/21/2012 5:27:57 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
I agree with both of you. Even with voting being voluntary, we have some of the most incompetent candidates receiving votes. Even when they are clearly and utterly lying to the voters, disregarding all cognitive dissonance to appeal to a specific group, or deliberately harming America, many candidates receive vast amounts of votes. When Mitt Romney wins a Primary election and Newt Gingrich is still in the running, you know the public is uneducated; and that's those motivated enough to participate. Extrapolate that to the most apathetic cretin of which you can think.

lol I should change this topic to, "Are IQ requirements prior to voting a good idea?"

Requiring IQ tests for voting could be a slippery slope imo.

People with high IQs can still be ignorant.

We need to test the knowledge of the constitution (such as multiple choices of correct passages), as well as a test on the candidate's platforms
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 11:17:26 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 10:20:14 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.

A general knowledge test can be studied for. IQ tests cannot. IQ tests measure the general aptitude of the person.

Do you realize that most people with higher amounts of education tend to be liberal? That means that they would probably abolish this rule after it was implemented . . .
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2012 11:21:09 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/21/2012 11:17:26 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:20:14 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/21/2012 10:06:17 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/21/2012 9:51:29 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Yes. IQ tests should be a requirement for voting. This will decrease the base of voters who are absolutely stupid and let people who actually know what they are doing control this country. A country fails when it is controlled by idiots.

NOTE: I don't believe in any tests.

Anyway: I don't think that IQ tests are the right kind of test to be administered. I think, if any test should be administered, it should be a general-knowledge-about-the-issues test.

A general knowledge test can be studied for. IQ tests cannot. IQ tests measure the general aptitude of the person.

Do you realize that most people with higher amounts of education tend to be liberal? That means that they would probably abolish this rule after it was implemented . . .

This is not true.

Liberals are overepresented among those with no college and those with graduate degrees. So, libs have both the least and most educated in society.

Cons have the folks in the middle.

On balance, it is about equal... maybe repubs are slightly more educated.
President of DDO