Scalia

[Dugout DickStone]

I want to vote with my cell phone

[Mrs. Gooch]

I want to vote with my cell phone

Yeah, why isn't there an app to vote yet? I mean, if Facebook can let me show my anger at a post then why can't I vote on my phone???

[star seed 7]

I want to vote with my cell phone

Yeah, why isn't there an app to vote yet? I mean, if Facebook can let me show my anger at a post then why can't I vote on my phone???

Regresocons will die before they allow citizens an easier path to voting

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

If we made it easier to vote than it already is, I'm sure that would be a welcome convenience for many voters. But I also think it would further dumb-down the electorate, and weren't we just discussing how the electorate is already too stupid? (It probably also encourages more fraud, but just leave that aside.)

[chuckjames]

If we made it easier to vote than it already is, I'm sure that would be a welcome convenience for many voters. But I also think it would further dumb-down the electorate, and weren't we just discussing how the electorate is already too stupid? (It probably also encourages more fraud, but just leave that aside.)

Isnt the whole point of your beloved constitution and this country that men are smart enough to govern themselves?

[CNS]

"You can cast your vote up to 4 times via twitter and facebook, and of course buy your favorite on iTunes"

[sys]

something like 2.5% of the population participated in nevada's pub primary, and they gave trump his largest victory margin to date.  so i'm not sure if ksuw should be hanging his hat on limiting voter participation as the means of preserving his preferred ideology.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I think outlawing caucuses would be a nice first step toward improving voter turnout.

[CNS]

I think outlawing caucuses would be a nice first step toward improving voter turnout.

There should be some legislation providing an actual structure to the system rather than two private companies(RNC and DNC) doing what they want.

[ChiComCat]

If we made it easier to vote than it already is, I'm sure that would be a welcome convenience for many voters. But I also think it would further dumb-down the electorate, and weren't we just discussing how the electorate is already too stupid? (It probably also encourages more fraud, but just leave that aside.)

I think plenty of stupid people vote already.  I enjoyed the mail in ballot when I was in Colorado, even if widespread voter fraud got Gardner elected.  I was able to sit down with my iPad and do some research on the races I was not fully up to speed with.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

If we made it easier to vote than it already is, I'm sure that would be a welcome convenience for many voters. But I also think it would further dumb-down the electorate, and weren't we just discussing how the electorate is already too stupid? (It probably also encourages more fraud, but just leave that aside.)

Isnt the whole point of your beloved constitution and this country that men are smart enough to govern themselves?

My beloved constitution? Good grief. Also, the Constitution says nothing, either explicitly or implicitly, about making it easier for the laziest and dumbest members of our society to vote. It's already pretty easy. In fact, there were much stricter limitations on the right to vote when the Constitution was written.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I think plenty of stupid people vote already.

Yes. But let's not make it worse.

I enjoyed the mail in ballot when I was in Colorado, even if widespread voter fraud got Gardner elected.  I was able to sit down with my iPad and do some research on the races I was not fully up to speed with.

So... you're ok with fraud devaluing your vote, as long as it's easier? Tell you what: if it's easier for you, just email your vote to [email protected]. It probably won't count, but as long as it's easier, right?

[chuckjames]

If we made it easier to vote than it already is, I'm sure that would be a welcome convenience for many voters. But I also think it would further dumb-down the electorate, and weren't we just discussing how the electorate is already too stupid? (It probably also encourages more fraud, but just leave that aside.)

Isnt the whole point of your beloved constitution and this country that men are smart enough to govern themselves?

My beloved constitution? Good grief. Also, the Constitution says nothing, either explicitly or implicitly, about making it easier for the laziest and dumbest members of our society to vote. It's already pretty easy. In fact, there were much stricter limitations on the right to vote when the Constitution was written.

That's not my point. My point is the foundation of this country is based on the fact that man should be self governed. And you're basically saying man is too stupid to be self governed. Which I agree with.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

If we made it easier to vote than it already is, I'm sure that would be a welcome convenience for many voters. But I also think it would further dumb-down the electorate, and weren't we just discussing how the electorate is already too stupid? (It probably also encourages more fraud, but just leave that aside.)

Isnt the whole point of your beloved constitution and this country that men are smart enough to govern themselves?

My beloved constitution? Good grief. Also, the Constitution says nothing, either explicitly or implicitly, about making it easier for the laziest and dumbest members of our society to vote. It's already pretty easy. In fact, there were much stricter limitations on the right to vote when the Constitution was written.

That's not my point. My point is the foundation of this country is based on the fact that man should be self governed. And you're basically saying man is too stupid to be self governed. Which I agree with.

No, I'm not making a point about "man" at all. I am saying that some men (and women) are so stupid and immature that they ought not be voting. There's absolutely nothing inconsistent about that. We already have limitations on voting, and that is not contrary to the Constitution or the vague notion of "self-governance."

[chuckjames]

If we made it easier to vote than it already is, I'm sure that would be a welcome convenience for many voters. But I also think it would further dumb-down the electorate, and weren't we just discussing how the electorate is already too stupid? (It probably also encourages more fraud, but just leave that aside.)

Isnt the whole point of your beloved constitution and this country that men are smart enough to govern themselves?

My beloved constitution? Good grief. Also, the Constitution says nothing, either explicitly or implicitly, about making it easier for the laziest and dumbest members of our society to vote. It's already pretty easy. In fact, there were much stricter limitations on the right to vote when the Constitution was written.

That's not my point. My point is the foundation of this country is based on the fact that man should be self governed. And you're basically saying man is too stupid to be self governed. Which I agree with.

No, I'm not making a point about "man" at all. I am saying that some men (and women) are so stupid and immature that they ought not be voting. There's absolutely nothing inconsistent about that. We already have limitations on voting, and that is not contrary to the Constitution or the vague notion of "self-governance."

So basically if someone doesn't agree with you they shouldn't vote because they are obviously stupid. The disdain you show for your fellow Americans is exactly why Trump is winning FYI.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

something like 2.5% of the population participated in nevada's pub primary, and they gave trump his largest victory margin to date.  so i'm not sure if ksuw should be hanging his hat on limiting voter participation as the means of preserving his preferred ideology.

Uh huh. So you're saying that by making it easier to vote, the number of intelligent, engaged people who will now vote but otherwise would not have ('cause it was just too darned hard to have an ID / drive to a polling location) will equal or exceed the number of morons for whom a canvasser with an iPad will cast their vote for them? Look, I can't prove you're wrong, but I've got enough common sense to know you're wrong.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

If we made it easier to vote than it already is, I'm sure that would be a welcome convenience for many voters. But I also think it would further dumb-down the electorate, and weren't we just discussing how the electorate is already too stupid? (It probably also encourages more fraud, but just leave that aside.)

Isnt the whole point of your beloved constitution and this country that men are smart enough to govern themselves?

My beloved constitution? Good grief. Also, the Constitution says nothing, either explicitly or implicitly, about making it easier for the laziest and dumbest members of our society to vote. It's already pretty easy. In fact, there were much stricter limitations on the right to vote when the Constitution was written.

That's not my point. My point is the foundation of this country is based on the fact that man should be self governed. And you're basically saying man is too stupid to be self governed. Which I agree with.

No, I'm not making a point about "man" at all. I am saying that some men (and women) are so stupid and immature that they ought not be voting. There's absolutely nothing inconsistent about that. We already have limitations on voting, and that is not contrary to the Constitution or the vague notion of "self-governance."

So basically if someone doesn't agree with you they shouldn't vote because they are obviously stupid. The disdain you show for your fellow Americans is exactly why Trump is winning FYI.

No, that's absolutely not what I said. At all. But if that's how you interpreted what I said, you probably aren't smart enough that you should be voting.

[chuckjames]

If we made it easier to vote than it already is, I'm sure that would be a welcome convenience for many voters. But I also think it would further dumb-down the electorate, and weren't we just discussing how the electorate is already too stupid? (It probably also encourages more fraud, but just leave that aside.)

Isnt the whole point of your beloved constitution and this country that men are smart enough to govern themselves?

My beloved constitution? Good grief. Also, the Constitution says nothing, either explicitly or implicitly, about making it easier for the laziest and dumbest members of our society to vote. It's already pretty easy. In fact, there were much stricter limitations on the right to vote when the Constitution was written.

That's not my point. My point is the foundation of this country is based on the fact that man should be self governed. And you're basically saying man is too stupid to be self governed. Which I agree with.

No, I'm not making a point about "man" at all. I am saying that some men (and women) are so stupid and immature that they ought not be voting. There's absolutely nothing inconsistent about that. We already have limitations on voting, and that is not contrary to the Constitution or the vague notion of "self-governance."

So basically if someone doesn't agree with you they shouldn't vote because they are obviously stupid. The disdain you show for your fellow Americans is exactly why Trump is winning FYI.

No, that's absolutely not what I said. At all. But if that's how you interpreted what I said, you probably aren't smart enough that you should be voting.

Ok then tell me..in Chant's perfect work who should be able to vote?

[ChiComCat]

I think plenty of stupid people vote already.

Yes. But let's not make it worse.

I enjoyed the mail in ballot when I was in Colorado, even if widespread voter fraud got Gardner elected.  I was able to sit down with my iPad and do some research on the races I was not fully up to speed with.

So... you're ok with fraud devaluing your vote, as long as it's easier? Tell you what: if it's easier for you, just email your vote to [email protected]. It probably won't count, but as long as it's easier, right?

I was joking about the fraud.  I think it was you that mentioned a long while back that Colorado would likely have voter fraud by the crafty democrats, meanwhile the democrat was voted out of office for a republican.

[star seed 7]

I told you, regresocons will fight tooth and nail to make voting as as much of a pain in the ass as possible because they know their party ideals don't jive with a majority of Americans

[sys]

Uh huh. So you're saying that by making it easier to vote, the number of intelligent, engaged people who will now vote but otherwise would not have ('cause it was just too darned hard to have an ID / drive to a polling location) will equal or exceed the number of morons for whom a canvasser with an iPad will cast their vote for them? Look, I can't prove you're wrong, but I've got enough common sense to know you're wrong.

i'm saying that we just had an election where 2.5% of the population participated and they overwhelmingly chose a candidate you consider to be stupid.  the data (datum, so by all means show me more) simply doesn't support your hypothesis.

[michigancat]

Uh huh. So you're saying that by making it easier to vote, the number of intelligent, engaged people who will now vote but otherwise would not have ('cause it was just too darned hard to have an ID / drive to a polling location) will equal or exceed the number of morons for whom a canvasser with an iPad will cast their vote for them? Look, I can't prove you're wrong, but I've got enough common sense to know you're wrong.

i'm saying that we just had an election where 2.5% of the population participated and they overwhelmingly chose a candidate you consider to be stupid.  the data (datum, so by all means show me more) simply doesn't support your hypothesis.

maybe he thinks that higher participation would have led to an even larger trump landslide?

[michigancat]

And I mean, I do kind of admire the fact that he comes right out and says he wants to disenfranchise a significant amount of people because of their intelligence rather than hiding behind voter fraud concerns. It's an interesting honesty.

[CNS]

Both parties want as few ppl voting as possible.

[sys]

maybe he thinks that higher participation would have led to an even larger trump landslide?

maybe you've got to get below 1% before the reasoned voters can outnumber the low-infos.