Zone1 Do you agree with this statement about voting?

[rightwinger]

Go ahead and ask me one of those Jim Crow like questions that would disqualify me from voting in your Democratic Party controlled paradise.

https://sharetngov.tnsosfiles.com/tsla/exhibits/aale/pdfs/Voter%20Test%20LA.pdf

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

https://sharetngov.tnsosfiles.com/tsla/exhibits/aale/pdfs/Voter%20Test%20LA.pdf

Democratic party Jim Crow shit whats your point ?

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

it turns out they were "dixiecrats." except of course the loyal republicans like strom thurmnd and jesse helms. you may have a few crazies like that in your party now.

we got rid of ours.

No fuck you didn't. Robert Byrd was a life time Democrat, you loons think Johnson was a Civil Rights champion but that man was racist as fuck. Biden is also a racist.

 

[Coyote]

The idea is that stakeholders vote.

Have you ever heard this?
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.”
― Alexander Fraser Tytler

Which is our stage?

Everyone is a stakeholder by virtue of being a citizen. If they pay taxes, regardless of what kind, they have a right to have a say in how it is spent.

I don’t see everyone voting for “free stuff” either even if they don’t own land. But the history of land ownership itself is interesting and historically very exclusionary from the era of the colonies. Land was distributed or sold on something of a patronage system that kept most of it in the hands of a few. Even now, only 65.8% are homeowners.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Everyone is a stakeholder by virtue of being a citizen. If they pay taxes, regardless of what kind, they have a right to have a say in how it is spent.

I don’t see everyone voting for “free stuff” either even if they don’t own land. But the history of land ownership itself is interesting and historically very exclusionary from the era of the colonies. Land was distributed or sold on something of a patronage system that kept most of it in the hands of a few. Even now, only 65.8% are homeowners.

Those who are indigent and receive their primary income as benefits will vote themselves increased benefits. They have no regard as to the burden it puts on others.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Voting should be limited to those who are sentient.

 

[noonereal]

One of our esteemed members posted this, just wondering how many agree.

Would America be a much better nation if only white Christian male heterosexual Veteran land owners were permitted to vote in ANY and all elections?

A rather moronic question, would you not say?

If anything, only allow the educated a vote.

 

[Phactotum]

One of our esteemed members posted this, just wondering how many agree.

Would America be a much better nation if only white Christian male heterosexual Veteran land owners were permitted to vote in ANY and all elections?

If that is the case, then what is the flipside of that scenario? Which instills fairness??

Does it mean that only Christian male heterosexual Veteran land owners get to *pay taxes
*fund the GOVT its trillions of dollars
*go die in Wars and Int'l conflicts we have

While America's non-voters get to do other things with their monies and energy?
If that is the case, then yes, I think it is possible that America could be a better nation for non-voters at least.

Although, I do not think the Christian male heterosexual Veteran land owner will enjoy that circumstance for long once all of their $$$ is going to pay overhead expenses of our country's GOVT agencies.

 

[Mac-7]

One of our esteemed members posted this, just wondering how many agree.

Would America be a much better nation if only white Christian male heterosexual Veteran land owners were permitted to vote in ANY and all elections?

I will answer your question if you will answer mine

Will America be a better place if whites are replaced entirely by brown people?

 

[Phactotum]

Will America be a better place if whites are replaced entirely by brown people?

I think that it would be a worse place.
Because, this planet is controlled by White people.
Therefore a nation of Brown people only, would start to be mistreated and handled like 2nd-Class citizens by other powerful nations [Europe, Eurasia/China/Russia, Middle East, Israel, etc] that are controlled by Caucasian/White-looking people.

 

[Care4all]

This may surprise some, but NO!!

The white, Christian and Veteran caveats are too much.

I’m all for male, tax paying land owners being the only voters.

Nope!

All white male voters gave us a Civil War....

 

[alang1216]

One of our esteemed members posted this, just wondering how many agree.

Would America be a much better nation if only white Christian male heterosexual Veteran land owners were permitted to vote in ANY and all elections?

America would be a MUCH BETTER place! At least for white Christian male heterosexual Veteran land owners, for everyone else, meaning the majority of Americans, not so much.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Will America be a better place if whites are replaced entirely by brown people?

It would be a worse place if all of anyone race were replaced by another. Variety is the spice of life.

 

[Mac-7]

It would be a worse place if all of anyone race were replaced by another. Variety is the spice of life.

And my answer to you is that all citizens should be entitled to one legal vote per election

I dont approve of mail-in balloting

but in-person voting should apply to white male Christian heterosexual Veteran land owners just like everyone else

 

[Coyote]

Those who are indigent and receive their primary income as benefits will vote themselves increased benefits. They have no regard as to the burden it puts on others.

And you know this how? It sounds more like the perpetuation of a common stereotype against the poor used to deprive them of their rights and giving power to the plutocrats, not the people. Only 63% of Americans are home owners, you would disenfranchise almost half of America.

What is happening is you have to keep adjusting your goal posts to fit your goal: disenfranchise the poor and give all power to the wealthy.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

And you know this how? It sounds more like the perpetuation of a common stereotype against the poor used to deprive them of their rights and giving power to the plutocrats, not the people. Only 63% of Americans are home owners, you would disenfranchise almost half of America.

What is happening is you have to keep adjusting your goal posts to fit your goal: disenfranchise the poor and give all power to the wealthy.

Do you understand that those receiving public benefits vote to increase those benefits? They do so without regard to the cost or burden to others.

 

[Coyote]

Do you understand that those receiving public benefits vote to increase those benefits? They do so without regard to the cost or burden to others.

Show me actual data that shows a correlation. Benefits have remained largely static for good long time. I also haven’t seen much campaigning on increasing beyond cost of living adjustments. There are a whole lot of issues they are likely voting on.

But…if you feel that anyone who receives public benefits should be excluded, that would disenfranchise:

Disabled people.
Many elderly people.
Veterans
Most farmers.
Many business owners.