User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:34:19 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You get as much representation as you earn. No stake. No say. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Our founders never intended voting to be a universal right. It was intended and written into the constitution to be an earned privilege. They knew a constituency with no skin in the game would destroy the country. They knew a voter base full of uneducated, uninformed people will vote for leaders who are unfit. Those with nothing to lose and no interest at stake would vote away rights, liberty, at the promise for a hand out. And here we are. The blue smoke is out of the box and there's no way to put it back in. And the number of voters with no skin in the game out number those who do, or soon will. Not really a fan of tyranny myself, but that's probably just because I am overly fond of liberty and representative government. You get as much representation as you earn. No stake. No say. That last part is key. If you have no stake (business and/or land ownership for example) then you could conceivably not care about what happens. Oh wait...that happened... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:34:40 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No representation without taxation. I like the concept, but I think it would be too easy to "cheat". I can already see the mailer of a $5 check (of Soros's money) already made out the feds and this form already filled out: 
Bang... instant "taxpayer". |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:37:39 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No representation without taxation. The untaxed would be represented, but would not be involved in picking the representative. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:37:49 AM EDT
[#4]
i don't think you should be allowed to vote unless you file a tax return every year
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:38:36 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They incorrectly assumed sense and intellect would carry on and didn't see the need to spell out things they thought so obvious. Make something foolproof and only fools will use it sort of thing imho. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If the founders had wanted only a subset of the population to vote, they should have written it into the Constitution. It was in states constitutions. The mentality at the time was sovereign states. Who would think of letting idiots decide how we're governed? Then politicians figured out that uninformed voters of little means are easy votes to buy. Correct. And the founders left a means to correct an injustice if the people of the several states decided to. If they had felt strongly about it they should have written it into Article I and defined who could vote. They incorrectly assumed sense and intellect would carry on and didn't see the need to spell out things they thought so obvious. Make something foolproof and only fools will use it sort of thing imho. Just so long as you understand that any mechanism to limit voting to a subset you approve of, will eventually be used against you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:38:38 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I agree, but you are going to get hammered This. It wasn't even seen so much as women not being able to vote, but rather, it was seen as the head of household casting a vote for the family. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:40:58 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would hope we could all agree that if you don't contribute, you have no right to direct the course of the country. Voting yourself a larger welfare check, to be paid by those who contribute, while shaming those very individuals paying your way, is lunacy. Yes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:41:15 AM EDT
[#8]
Just look at who screams the loudest anytime any accountability at all is suggested for voting rights.
It'll be a cold day in he'll if we were to ever be able to require any competency or knowledge to vote. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:42:19 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I would hope we could all agree that if you don't contribute, you have no right to direct the course of the country. Voting yourself a larger welfare check, to be paid by those who contribute, while shaming those very individuals paying your way, is lunacy. Yes.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:42:28 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My beloved wife has stated she'd give up her right to vote for a repeal of 19th. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'd say it more simply: Women's suffrage is the core issue. There are so many wonderful female conservatives that I hate saying it, but most female voters are immune to reason and logic. Everyone I know that can't be trusted to hold a civil political discussion is a woman. They make "feels" a core political ideology. There is nothing that can be done obviously other than to try to breed the cuntiest women out of existence. My beloved wife has stated she'd give up her right to vote for a repeal of 19th. My mom and wife keep saying the same, although my wife can't vote yet.p anyways. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:43:18 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Take out women's suffrage and gun control shrivels up, the war on drugs and prohibition never happened. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:43:22 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They incorrectly assumed sense and intellect would carry on and didn't see the need to spell out things they thought so obvious. Make something foolproof and only fools will use it sort of thing imho. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If the founders had wanted only a subset of the population to vote, they should have written it into the Constitution. It was in states constitutions. The mentality at the time was sovereign states. Who would think of letting idiots decide how we're governed? Then politicians figured out that uninformed voters of little means are easy votes to buy. Correct. And the founders left a means to correct an injustice if the people of the several states decided to. If they had felt strongly about it they should have written it into Article I and defined who could vote. They incorrectly assumed sense and intellect would carry on and didn't see the need to spell out things they thought so obvious. Make something foolproof and only fools will use it sort of thing imho. Fools, yes. But don't leave out the seven deadly sins......which all humans suffer from to one degree or another. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:43:50 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just look at who screams the loudest anytime any accountability at all is suggested for voting rights. It'll be a cold day in he'll if we were to ever be able to require any competency or knowledge to vote. I wonder if the "Guam will flip over" asshole would qualify to vote for himself....my guess...NO |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:44:18 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
OP nailed it. Ditto....... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:45:36 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just so long as you understand that any mechanism to limit voting to a subset you approve of, will eventually be used against you. Explain how the US changed from a nation with a limited franchise into a nation with a more limited franchise. That is, tell us how a system in which voting was limited to a subset of the population became a system which prevented members of the originally enfranchised subset from voting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:47:26 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Like I say in most of these threads... Racist Democrats fucked up the literacy/competency test for voting concept. Entire naturalization exam (not just a few random questions) for everyone at 18 and every 10 years thereafter. No pass, no vote, no matter where you were born. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:48:27 AM EDT
[#17]
We all enjoy pointing the gnarled finger of blame, never recognizing to whom that finger belongs to.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:49:42 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
... Just so long as you understand that any mechanism to limit voting to a subset you approve of, will eventually be used against you. Restricting voting was rarely an effective weapon against conservative policies. Unrestricted voting has been highly effective against them, first with women; presently with mass immigration. It doesn't matter that you can vote when the enemy has more voters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:50:26 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
i don't think you should be allowed to vote unless you file a tax return pay income tax every year Fixed it I worked at Rent A Center and every year people would come in whose only income was a combination of SSI, SSD, Welfare, and child support, and they are bragging about there 10k tax return cause of their 5 bastard kids. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:52:17 AM EDT
[#20]
[youtube]https://youtu.be/eU6YDB9lqjQ[/youtube]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:53:50 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Mine too. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'd say it more simply: Women's suffrage is the core issue. There are so many wonderful female conservatives that I hate saying it, but most female voters are immune to reason and logic. Everyone I know that can't be trusted to hold a civil political discussion is a woman. They make "feels" a core political ideology. There is nothing that can be done obviously other than to try to breed the cuntiest women out of existence. My beloved wife has stated she'd give up her right to vote for a repeal of 19th. Mine too. Mine too. She has seen behind the curtain and believes that women are too crazy to have a say in the way the country is run. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:54:02 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol. That wasn't a thing before the Jim Crow era. They invented it specifically to disenfranchise black people, and the tests were all rigged so that the people giving them could fail anyone who took them no matter how they answered. White people didn't have to take the tests, by the way. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Like I say in most of these threads... Racist Democrats fucked up the literacy/competency test for voting concept. Entire naturalization exam (not just a few random questions) for everyone at 18 and every 10 years thereafter. No pass, no vote, no matter where you were born. Actually it started in new England to keep the Irish from voting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:55:28 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol. That wasn't a thing before the Jim Crow era. They invented it specifically to disenfranchise black people, and the tests were all rigged so that the people giving them could fail anyone who took them no matter how they answered. White people didn't have to take the tests, by the way. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Like I say in most of these threads... Racist Democrats fucked up the literacy/competency test for voting concept. Entire naturalization exam (not just a few random questions) for everyone at 18 and every 10 years thereafter. No pass, no vote, no matter where you were born. Isn't that exactly what I said... that racist Democrats fucked up the concept? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:58:42 AM EDT
[#24]
We went wring when we allowed the argument to win that, "It is a travesty that unregistered illegals can not vote!!!" The argument of, "Unregistered, illegal votes dilutes and hurts everyone else. Period."
Nelson Mandela agrees: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:59:38 AM EDT
[#25]
Just get rid of women.
That will solve all problems right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 11:59:48 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
i don't think you should be allowed to vote unless you file a tax return every year I don't think you should be allowed to vote if you aren't a net taxpayer. So no voting for fed or state employees. Active military... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:00:15 PM EDT
[#27]
OP effing nailed it, the 19th amendment is a piece of shit.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:01:27 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't think you should be allowed to vote if you aren't a net taxpayer. So no voting for fed or state employees. Active military... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
i don't think you should be allowed to vote unless you file a tax return every year I don't think you should be allowed to vote if you aren't a net taxpayer. So no voting for fed or state employees. Active military... Ya. The guys who sign up to defend your right to free speech and 2A shouldn't be allowed to vote. They should only be allowed to put a boot on your throat and shoot your dog. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:01:45 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Explain how the US changed from a nation with a limited franchise into a nation with a more limited franchise. That is, tell us how a system in which voting was limited to a subset of the population became a system which prevented members of the originally enfranchised subset from voting. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just so long as you understand that any mechanism to limit voting to a subset you approve of, will eventually be used against you. Explain how the US changed from a nation with a limited franchise into a nation with a more limited franchise. That is, tell us how a system in which voting was limited to a subset of the population became a system which prevented members of the originally enfranchised subset from voting. Derp! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:09:00 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
well now that we've come to that conclusion, who shouldn't be allowed to vote? FSA, illegals, women, retards, those working for/in government, anyone that refuses/can't read the Constitution before placing their vote (as an intelligence/aptitude test), refugees, and dead people The ladies will be butthurt being lumped in, but in general women vote with their feelz instead of logic.* *doesn't apply to all the women's here, so sorry |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:09:15 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: Our founders never intended voting to be a universal right. It was intended and written into the constitution to be an earned privilege. They knew a constituency with no skin in the game would destroy the country. They knew a voter base full of uneducated, uninformed people will vote for leaders who are unfit. Those with nothing to lose and no interest at stake would vote away rights, liberty, at the promise for a hand out. And here we are. The blue smoke is out of the box and there's no way to put it back in. And the number of voters with no skin in the game out number those who do, or soon will. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:12:25 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Right... Yet men have very different voting patterns. Saying "yeah but not all of them" isn't exactly a useful statement. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If the founders had wanted only a subset of the population to vote, they should have written it into the Constitution. Last I checked, we wrote an amendment to give women the right to vote...hence...changing the constitution. People with no skin in the game having a voice on how things are run and how our time and money is spent are the problem. It can only end in disaster and that is what we are going to see occur if Hillary wins. Right... Yet men have very different voting patterns. Saying "yeah but not all of them" isn't exactly a useful statement. Historically, men vote Republican less than ten percent more than do women. There are better demographic predictors of voting preference than gender - marital status and population density, for example. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:15:06 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There are better demographic predictors of voting preference than gender - marital status and population density, for example. This. Why do you think the Marxists want to destroy the institution of marriage and pack us into cities? That's been two of the most prevalent "plays" from the left over the last couple of decades, and it damn sure isn't an accident. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:19:11 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This. Why do you think the Marxists want to destroy the institution of marriage and pack us into cities? That's been two of the most prevalent "plays" from the left over the last couple of decades, and it damn sure isn't an accident. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
There are better demographic predictors of voting preference than gender - marital status and population density, for example. This. Why do you think the Marxists want to destroy the institution of marriage and pack us into cities? That's been two of the most prevalent "plays" from the left over the last couple of decades, and it damn sure isn't an accident. Where does race factor into that when you have Mid 90's of black voters voting as a block for a specific candidate? That would seem to be a pretty damn good "predictor"....... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:21:31 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Where does race factor into that when you have Mid 90's of black voters voting as a block for a specific candidate? That would seem to be a pretty damn good "predictor"....... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There are better demographic predictors of voting preference than gender - marital status and population density, for example. This. Why do you think the Marxists want to destroy the institution of marriage and pack us into cities? That's been two of the most prevalent "plays" from the left over the last couple of decades, and it damn sure isn't an accident. Where does race factor into that when you have Mid 90's of black voters voting as a block for a specific candidate? That would seem to be a pretty damn good "predictor"....... "Control" that ~90% block for marital status and living in an urban shithole and see how far it goes down. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:22:07 PM EDT
[#36]
Net taxpayers vote. Problem solved. Problem staying solved.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:22:21 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Control" that ~90% block for marital status and living in an urban shithole and see how far it goes down. Do you have a number? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:30:31 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ya. The guys who sign up to defend your right to free speech and 2A shouldn't be allowed to vote. They should only be allowed to put a boot on your throat and shoot your dog. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
i don't think you should be allowed to vote unless you file a tax return every year I don't think you should be allowed to vote if you aren't a net taxpayer. So no voting for fed or state employees. Active military... Ya. The guys who sign up to defend your right to free speech and 2A shouldn't be allowed to vote. They should only be allowed to put a boot on your throat and shoot your dog. Feels, you has them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:31:04 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Y'all realize that prohibition was the 18th amendment, while women's suffrage was the 19th, right? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Take out women's suffrage and gun control shrivels up, the war on drugs and prohibition never happened. Are you saying women couldn't vote until the 19th amendment? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:35:52 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do you have a number? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
"Control" that ~90% block for marital status and living in an urban shithole and see how far it goes down. Do you have a number? I do not. And I am lazy and don't feel like digging around on the interwebz for data that may or may not be there. 
It's pure conjecture on my part, albeit conjecture I'm pretty sure would turn out to be correct. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:36:32 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Isn't that exactly what I said... that racist Democrats fucked up the concept? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Like I say in most of these threads... Racist Democrats fucked up the literacy/competency test for voting concept. Entire naturalization exam (not just a few random questions) for everyone at 18 and every 10 years thereafter. No pass, no vote, no matter where you were born. Isn't that exactly what I said... that racist Democrats fucked up the concept? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:38:27 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They invented it. It's a fucked up concept. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Like I say in most of these threads... Racist Democrats fucked up the literacy/competency test for voting concept. Entire naturalization exam (not just a few random questions) for everyone at 18 and every 10 years thereafter. No pass, no vote, no matter where you were born. Isn't that exactly what I said... that racist Democrats fucked up the concept? It's an excellent concept. The fact that it wasn't widely used until it was used in a shitty way doesn't change that one bit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:42:30 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just get rid of women. That will solve all problems right? I suspect it would be very freeing for some in GD. They can finally actualize the love that they cannot speak of.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:45:50 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Are you saying women couldn't vote until the 19th amendment? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Take out women's suffrage and gun control shrivels up, the war on drugs and prohibition never happened. Are you saying women couldn't vote until the 19th amendment? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:48:43 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted:
Our founders never intended voting to be a universal right. It was intended and written into the constitution to be an earned privilege. They knew a constituency with no skin in the game would destroy the country. They knew a voter base full of uneducated, uninformed people will vote for leaders who are unfit. Those with nothing to lose and no interest at stake would vote away rights, liberty, at the promise for a hand out. And here we are. The blue smoke is out of the box and there's no way to put it back in. And the number of voters with no skin in the game out number those who do, or soon will. The red is the keystone of your whole philosophy. I agree and was just saying the same thing to my GF last night. Shockingly she agreed. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:50:23 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Take out women's suffrage and gun control shrivels up, the war on drugs and prohibition never happened. The commercials they are running the most in my area are the ones that do with kids. You know, to appeal to the mothers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 12:51:53 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not everywhere. Also, note that the state legislatures are the ones who ratified the 18th amendment. How does this reconcile with the idea that the state legislatures picking federal senators would be any different than the popular vote? If women voting in some states could screw things up that much it doesn't seem like it would make much of a difference to me. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Take out women's suffrage and gun control shrivels up, the war on drugs and prohibition never happened. Are you saying women couldn't vote until the 19th amendment? Women could vote in most states by that time, and their votes affected who would be ratifying the 18th amendment or not. Additionally, federally, laws like this generally follow what the states have already done, and many states already had gone the prohibition route to make gradual progress. Anyway, the temperance movement also listed among its goals women's suffrage because women were such champions of prohibition at the time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 1:26:30 PM EDT
[#48]
You want a revolution? Restricting the vote is a good way to get a revolution. Broadening the vote, on the other hand, has acted as a safety valve and allowed the system to reform without being destroyed.
As the old-line aristocrat Don Frabrizio, Prince of Salina, said in the classic novel "The Leopard," "Things must change in order that things can remain the same." This is the essence of enlightened conservatism. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 1:34:12 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You want a revolution? Restricting the vote is a good way to get a revolution. Broadening the vote, on the other hand, has acted as a safety valve and allowed the system to reform without being destroyed. As the old-line aristocrat Don Frabrizio, Prince of Salina, said in the classic novel "The Leopard," "Things must change in order that things can remain the same." This is the essence of enlightened conservatism. The previous system is destroyed Broadening the vote to the uneducated, uninformed, and those on the dole have destroyed the essence of our republic. And it will snowball from here until it crashes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 1:43:23 PM EDT
[#50]
OP, I've been saying that for years myself.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
