Earning the Vote

[Ravenshire]

What we need is not a further bar to voting, but a change in how we vote. Mandatory, ranked choice voting would be a far better system than the two-party, first past the goalpost, bullshit system we have now.

And for fuck's sake, eliminate (or side-step via the interstate compact) the electoral college.

[Thumpalumpacus]

It's their job to communicate this shit to us, not our job to be experts.  

Uninformed voters are vulnerable to manipulation, don't you think? And do you trust politicians to communicate this shit to us for our benefit or their own?

I think voters having better bullshit detectors might defeat politicians who want incumbent job security rather than the national interest in mind. I can't see the value of having voters remain ignorant.

Or -- are you arguing that Trumpist communications are as honest as any others, and voters ought to accept Jewish space lasers or other rank lies as equally valid?

Me, I think better civics education is likely a better corrective than trusting any politician no matter their party. YMMV.

[The Grand Nudger]

Requiring politicians pass the sorts of competency tests floated for voters doesn't seem, to me, to prevent voters from also informing themselves. It just sets up a situation where a person whose knowledge does matter, because their votes do matter, because they have votes we don't even have in the first place, must be competent.

We don't (or at least we like to think we don't) hand cops a gun and a badge when they walk in off the street either. We wanna make sure they really know camel. We don't let high school grads operate on hearts. You have to get different sorts of licenses to drive different sorts of vehicles, ffs.

We demand more of Cletus than we demand of the people we empower to make life or death decisions. It's ludicrous.

[The Grand Nudger]

-and I want to add that, if the metric for knowing whether or not voters are well informed is whether they vote for reich wing charlatans, then the common us citizen has been doing great for longer than my entire adult life - but we don't have the government or the country to show for that. Not now, and not at any point during that time.

We can't really explain that while burying our heads to it's cause. Kakistocracy, and a kakistocrats existential need to zero out votes.

[Angrboda]

People who are convinced that votes don't matter aren't likely to vote at all. So, not much of a barrier.  It's kind of like being convinced that skydiving is too dangerous, then bitching that parachutes are out of your price range.

Boru

It's not really an issue of simply being convinced as it is being plain and simply true by design.  That's what we murricans are always bitching about when we talk about extreme gerrymandering.  About cracking and packing.  That much is assuming that a party you would vote for even runs a candidate where you are, too... but often enough, they don't - because gerrymandering makes it a waste of funding.

It's weird over here, obvs.  We seem to realize all these problems and then, mystifyingly, we insist that voting is the solution.  Voting is a solution to all sorts of things....but only if you vote in a system where votes can matter.  Even if we solved all of that, and even in a thread titled "earning the vote" precious little thought is given to politicians and parties earning the vote.  Because that's not actually how it works here.  They don't earn shit and don't have to, and will make sure that they don't have to, if they ever worry they might.

So, you know, it's our fault.  There's something wrong with the citizens.  They.....they...should have to earn the right to vote for someone they don't want to vote for in a contest where their vote can not matter, though that person need do nothing to earn that vote - and it's factual meaningless is irrelevant to the browbeaters.  Brilliant, no notes.

So here's my suggestion.  We can come up with as many tests and qualifications as we like.  All of them, every one, will apply to parties and politicians, not voters.  For example...politicians must demonstrate basic competence and understanding of issues.  It's their job to communicate this shit to us, not our job to be experts.  We can hook politicians up to a polygraph when they describe their policies and supposed benefits.  We can demand that politicians have served - civil or military.  We can demand that politicians take a quiz every time before they cast a vote.  I bet that leads to real change, and more change...quicker...than any disenfranchisement scheme.

That we even find ourselves asking these questions today is because a con man and carnival barker lied on his resume....and then we met george santos.

Nirvana fallacy in the first premise.

[Angrboda]

What we need is not a further bar to voting, but a change in how we vote. Mandatory, ranked choice voting would be a far better system than the two-party, first past the goalpost, bullshit system we have now.

And for fuck's sake, eliminate (or side-step via the interstate compact) the electoral college.

One problem with ranked choice voting is that it takes too long to explain to voters when you're canvassing. You don't have an extra 10 minutes every third voter.

[Ahriman]

What we need is not a further bar to voting, but a change in how we vote. Mandatory, ranked choice voting would be a far better system than the two-party, first past the goalpost, bullshit system we have now.

And for fuck's sake, eliminate (or side-step via the interstate compact) the electoral college.

Well yeah, it's a bullshit system. It wasn't supposed to work in the first place. It was always meant to, 1) be as ineffective as possible, and 2) be as ineffective as possible while still selling the general public on the idea that it actually works and that no other system could be implemented.

[FrustratedFool]

As a criteria, how about:

a) Must be 18+
b) Must be a citizen
c) Must have graduated general education (includes IQ test and citizenship lessons to be passed)
d) Must not be in prison
e) Must have completed mandatory 1 year citizen service
f) If between 18-50, must be eligible for conscription or a registered objector

Is this unfair?

[Ahriman]

As a criteria, how about:

a) Must be 18+
b) Must be a citizen
c) Must have graduated general education (includes IQ test and citizenship lessons to be passed)
d) Must not be in prison
e) Must have completed mandatory 1 year citizen service
f) If between 18-50, must be eligible for conscription or a registered objector

Is this unfair?

Should be 25+

What is "mandatory 1 year citizen service"

[FrustratedFool]

Why 25+?

Citizen service is like national service, only not restricted to just military (so could be other forms of civic work, like police, or health service, or charity work etc).