Should people in the US pass a political knowledge test before voting?

Asked by: Gaben11
  • It gives people a clear idea

    Although it seems new and doesn't make sense, It should be proposed because there are people in this world who do not have information about all this, They do it just for the sake of it. And arguing about equal rights is kind of dumb because one voter is just a drop in the ocean compared to the number of voters in the country and they don't make much of a difference. But still people shouldbe logical and have their reasons when voting for an elected representative, Although one voter doesnt matter hundreds of people with the same opinion can really make a change. So if we have these people voting for some random clown promising to help the country, They are gonna destroy the whole democracy. If people act like donkeys and continue to, This seems like the best choice as of now. And this test shouldn't be treated like your final exams or so. People should understand that it is a test to prove your worth even tho it seeems intimidating you shouldnt be because there should be no grades. Not really a test per se. But a normal quiz to prove you are worthy to be a voter.

  • Trump's supporters believe the unimaginable

    I despair when I see what people post, And seemingly believe, Though I can't see how.
    These people are destroying the country, And McConnell and other enablers are going along.
    May they all rot in hell.
    They believe that they are decent people. Decent people all despair of them all.

  • It would be personally inconvenient but I would support it

    We have too many people who vote for people simply because of race political group or gender. If the only thing you know about a candidate your voting for is their race political affiliation and or gender then your voting irresponsible and really should not be voting at all. You should know about each candidate's platform there personal and political background as well as what drives them as an individual. Everyone should educate themselves long before stepping into a voting booth.

  • Definitely people should understand current issues before being able to vote

    People hang on to slogans like "maga" or "medicare for all" without knowing what and how. I believe we don't have to understand the history (which is nice but not necessary) just a test which shows they understand current issues so that they can actually choose what they really want and not what sounds good. Some people tell me why they are voting for someone and when I explain the issues to them they change their mind completely. Also, Sometimes Presidents get voted in because of the hype surrounding them and not anything else.

  • To test them but not block them if they fail

    This action would indeed violate the constitution. The purpose of this should really be to inform them of whatever they might be missing. It should really be a REQUIREMENT to take the test PASS OR FAIL and not "YOU HAVE TO PASS". It doesn't have to take away voter rights, But at least show them the importance of why it "REALLY" matters.

  • Yes, To prevent politicians applying marketing techniques instead of scientific techniques.

    We need politicians to start giving realistic manifestos. Currently, Politicians all give unrealistic goals cause there is no pressure. Private companies normally have much better governance even ones that literally have profits and staff numbers that rival the GDPs and populations of small countries. This is because no CEO gets hired purely on slogans and unrealistic. If some is interviewing to be CEO and they say they can double the companies turnover, For example, They have to show why it is plausible show their calculations plus they are interviewed by other people who know the subject matter. But in a democracy we vote in people making promises who make arguments based on ideologies created centuries ago, I mean we still have politicians talking about Capitalism vs Communism in 2019, Referencing thinkers from yesteryear, Currently, Most countries are mixed economies. Whereas for example in the private sector if a company follows a best practice framework, Its normally the latest and it normally has versions that are updated and normally realistic. The fact evidence-based governance techniques exist and consensus existon best practices politicians are forced to take extreme positions just to get voted in. Democracy then changes and becomes a popularity contest and not a contest on the best way forward. Very rarely an extreme position is the one based on evidence to work, Generally, Things that work are quite boring. But unfortunately, An extreme position is the one that is most likely to get you into power. A test could be one way to solve this problem or if not a test, Parties should be forced to produced manifestos that they can prove scientifically and must be independently peer-reviewed at least for soundness by experts.

  • Too many ill-informed, Ignorant people on both sides.

    They need to let intelligent, Well-informed people decide elections and stay home and watch their reality TV. Politics is not a team sport. It's about compromise and governing for the common good. If someone can't grasp that, They need to not vote. This is why we have the party over country politicians we do in Washington.

  • For Senators and a portion of the electoral college: YES. For the lower house: NO

    All people ought to have a choice in representation. Yet it would be dangerous not to check the power of the ignorant and unaware. Proper policy requires a breadth of knowledge and intelligence across various fields. A society and culture ought not be gambled with by populist or nationalist movements that always occur during economic or social upheavals.

  • Critical thinking skills are a must.

    Without the ability to discern political subjects rationally a populus can easily fall victim to demagogues' rhetoric. School teaching standards talk a big game about teaching critical thinking skills, But far too many adults emerge from our educational system with no clue of how to separate fact from fiction. Without these skills humans do what they have always done when faced with a decision, Look around to see what other in their tribe are doing can do that same. It makes them feel comfortable, And no real thought is involved. Easy. Another easy out is to just vote based on name recognition. Hence celebrities with no qualifications can get millions of votes. I'm sorry but such people are squandering their democratic responsibilities and hampering the future of our republic.

  • It would make the country a more effective republic

    Many Americans go to the polls for all the wrong reasons: because somebody is of a specific race, Or gender, Or even because they simply don't like the alternatives and instead choose the "lesser evil". But voting this way is dangerous because it means politicians get voted into office based on their ability to manipulate the ignorant masses instead of their ability to effectively run a nation of hundreds of millions of people.

    Requiring voters to take a competency test before they vote means that only the qualified, Informed voters who know better go to the polls, Depriving predatory politicians of the chance to lie, Cheat, And steal their way to power.

  • No they shouldnt

    A a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a

  • No no no.

    If only a select number of people were eligible to vote, politicians would target their policies at those few (as seen already by politicians’ favour of pensioners who regularly vote) and would inevitably exclude those who do not. Those who could not vote, most probably those disadvantaged and in need of political attention, would therefore have no voice.

  • Who is the Vice Predent?

    I'm not saying you have to be a political junkie but you should be required to be able to recognize the Vice President of the United States and know what century it was when we gained our independence and who we fought to do so. We don'have to back to the 1700s, many of these geniuses don't know who our adversaries were in WW 2.

  • Voting is not a legal right! It is a human right!

    No one should be able to tell you if you can or cannot vote based off of test results! This is fascism! We are all born equal and all have the equal right to to choose our leaders!!! Voting is a human right! This is essential to our liberty !!

  • It may make sense on the surface, but requiring Political knowledge is a bed of thorns.

    Firstly the decisions made by the political machine affect everyone regardless of political intelligence. By barring someone from voting based on that political intelligence you are requiring that a person continue to submit themselves to the rule of law without allowing them any say in how or what areas it is enforced. Why should any person in that position continue to submit to the rule of law?
    Secondly how do you enforce a test on political intelligence? What should be in it??? If a man decides he wants to vote for Politician X because she is the only politician guaranteeing that she will keep open the school that the man's daughter attends should he be allowed to vote knowing only that? Or should he be excluded from the vote based on the fact he only wants to vote on that issue?
    This is to completely ignore the logistical concerns one would have in setting up such a system.

  • It's hard but... I have to say NO

    Democracy is the right for everyone to vote...
    No matter if he is good educated, rich, poor, black, white,a woman or a man.

    It's sometimes hard to accept that people which have no knowledge have the same right to vote then other, but that is how a democracy works!

    And we can be proud that we have one!

    Posted by: timC
  • What the heck

    This makes no sense. It is our constitutional right to vote, a right we fought for for many years to have. If only certain 'educated' people are allowed to vote it undermines the whole system we have. Our government is 'by the people, for the people', not 'for the people with political knowledge'.

  • Of course not.

    No, what's the reason for that? I think we can agree there are more politically involved people in the country than not, and their votes will outweigh the rest. Not to mention this definitely goes against the constitution. One of the things about being an american is that you born with the right to vote.

    Posted by: bete
  • Intelligence has nothing to do with our goals and opinions about the world.

    Just because someone doesn't know a lot about politics does not mean that they can't make decisions and understand which political party they agree with. Knowledge has nothing to do with someone making goals or choosing which way they like the world to work. Voting is all about someone's opinion, not knowledge.

  • Amounts to Poll Tax

    Verifying the education of someone before voting is like charging a poll tax. Plus, as long as someone can read and understand a ballot, one assumes they are intelligent enough to vote in an election. Although the electoral college was created to prevent illiterate masses from voting in elections, modern technology has remedied that situation.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.