New Voting Rights

Miggs · Post by **Miggs** » Wed Jul 07, 2010 9:38 pm

I believe the only people eligible to vote would be people who are productive members of society, you know, people who work and pay taxes. If you take from the government you shouldn't be able to cast a vote, of course you would vote for someone if they were going to give you something for free. My new law would weed out the dead beats out there.

blebs · Post by **blebs** » Wed Jul 07, 2010 9:40 pm

I think you need to broaden that a bit. How about people that work and pay taxes, worked and payed taxes, own real property, and I'm sure some other things should apply that aren't coming to me at the moment.

Hell just get rid of the illegal immigrants and we'll save half of this economy in no time.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Wed Jul 07, 2010 9:42 pm

Miggs wrote:I believe the only people eligible to vote would be people who are productive members of society, you know, people who work and pay taxes. If you take from the government you shouldn't be able to cast a vote, of course you would vote for someone if they were going to give you something for free. My new law would weed out the dead beats out there.

So what would be your theory on someone who got laid off and is looking for work, but isn't working at the time of an election?

Miggs · Post by **Miggs** » Wed Jul 07, 2010 9:47 pm

Roody wrote:So what would be your theory on someone who got laid off and is looking for work, but isn't working at the time of an election?

If you are eligible to collect unemployment from being layed off then you would have the right to vote.
People who are retired and have payed past taxes are also eligible.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 12:19 am

Your idea wouldn't change anything really. People making low wages might still want to vote for someone offering a handout.

Humboldt · Post by **Humboldt** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 12:41 am

YARDofSTUF wrote:Your idea wouldn't change anything really. People making low wages might still want to vote for someone offering a handout.

Democrats and Republicans would still be at each others' throats as well.

What if I make a killing in stocks and retire early? Still paying taxes but not working, could I vote?

What if my family left me enough money I never had to be employed?

Everyone takes from the government in some form or another.

mnosteele52 · Post by **mnosteele52** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 5:54 am

I have always felt this way, no representation without taxation. Why do the people who do not contribute to society have a say so in what happens in or to society?

TonyT · Post by **TonyT** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 6:35 am

mnosteele52 wrote:I have always felt this way, no representation without taxation. Why do the people who do not contribute to society have a say so in what happens in or to society?

Most that do not contribute anything at all to society don't take advantage of their right to have a say. Indeed, those that take and give nothing in return (criminals), don't vote at all.

I agree that those who do not contribute or have not contributed should have lesser rights, esp if they intentionally do not contribute, but I believe that the majority of these people don't make it to the polls anyway.

Miggs · Post by **Miggs** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 7:01 am

YARDofSTUF wrote:Your idea wouldn't change anything really. People making low wages might still want to vote for someone offering a handout.

You're missing the point, my law (Miggs Law) would keep people who don't pay taxes out of the voting booth, I heard somewhere that 50 percent of american households don't pay taxes.
Lets keep the people who don't put in to the system out of the system.

mnosteele52 · Post by **mnosteele52** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 9:01 am

TonyT wrote:......but I believe that the majority of these people don't make it to the polls anyway.

Except in the last election, there is one reason and one reason only the Obama was elected.... a certain demographic that never shows up for elections did show up and voted. This is a fact and not my opinion, it doesn't matter that I don't like Obama, it's simply the truth.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 9:11 am

mnosteele52 wrote:Except in the last election, there is one reason and one reason only the Obama was elected.... a certain demographic that never shows up for elections did show up and voted. This is a fact and not my opinion, it doesn't matter that I don't like Obama, it's simply the truth.

What's your point? Truth is every President gets elected because they ultimately appeal to a certain part of the electorate that their opponent doesn't. For Clinton he appealed to a younger group which was key to his Presidency. For President Bush he appealed to religious voters which was key to his Presidency and for President Obama he appealed to young black voters which were key to his Presidency. Facts are there is a first time for anything and in no way does Obama's appeal to young black voters cheapen his victory. Any suggestion otherwise is absurd.

tao_jones · Post by **tao_jones** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 10:44 am

Miggs wrote:You're missing the point, my law (Miggs Law) would keep people who don't pay taxes out of the voting booth, I heard somewhere that 50 percent of american households don't pay taxes.

How much of the 50% number are wealthy people with good accountants?

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:00 am

mnosteele52 wrote:Except in the last election, there is one reason and one reason only the Obama was elected.... a certain demographic that never shows up for elections did show up and voted. This is a fact and not my opinion, it doesn't matter that I don't like Obama, it's simply the truth.

I'll step in a second, but for only a single post:

I agree with this post since it is true that a certain demographic did turn up and vote to get him into office. The problem with this certain demographic is that they only voted for him cause he is also part of this certain demographic. The votes cast should have been based on a educational or well thought out reasons based on the ability for him or the other choice to run the country and run it well.

Did Clinton get help from the younger generation for his votes? Yea he sure did but he wasn't in this certain demographic.

Did Bush get help from groups of certain religion for his votes? Yeah prob so, but he wasn't part of all of these certain demographics either.

mnosteele52, your post here is solid and right on the money.

As for the topic at hand.... I agree also, don't contribute don't vote but it will NEVER happen.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:03 am

Sava700 wrote:The problem with this certain demographic is that they only voted for him cause he is also part of this certain demographic.

Link proving that to be the case in every scenario like you stated?

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:10 am

So if Obama only got votes "because he was part of a certain demographic"....why didn't McCain get votes from his "certain demographic"? I mean comon, it goes both ways...no matter now you try to delicately tiptoe around "race".

And lets not forget, using the above "certain demographic" membership, technically Obama is 50/50...his mother was white. So again using the above tiptoe around "race" and "votes because of..."...there's a 50/50 split there..doesn't get much more equal.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:15 am

YeOldeStonecat wrote:So if Obama only got votes "because he was part of a certain demographic"....why didn't McCain get votes from his "certain demographic"? I mean comon, it goes both ways...no matter now you try to delicately tiptoe around "race".

And lets not forget, using the above "certain demographic" membership, technically Obama is 50/50...his mother was white. So again using the above tiptoe around "race" and "votes because of..."...there's a 50/50 split there..doesn't get much more equal.

There you go again making sense man.

Convenient how some make the argument they are doing with him.

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:16 am

Miggs wrote:If you are eligible to collect unemployment from being layed off then you would have the right to vote.
People who are retired and have payed past taxes are also eligible.

I vote that another qualification to vote is to be able to show that you successfully earned your high school diploma and can prove it by at least passing 6th grade english/grammar tests.

Prey521 · Post by **Prey521** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:17 am

The only demographic that matters is the Independent Vote. Obama won the Independent voters over. Had McCain been able to do the same it would've overcome the Latino/Black votes that went to Obama. Independent voters trump all come election day.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:31 am

JBrazen wrote:The only demographic that matters is the Independent Vote. Obama won the Independent voters over. Had McCain been able to do the same it would've overcome the Latino/Black votes that went to Obama. Independent voters trump all come election day.

Thus the reason why Republicans will take back the House. Right now it appears they got the Independent vote.

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:31 am

YeOldeStonecat wrote:I vote that another qualification to vote is to be able to show that you successfully earned your high school diploma and can prove it by at least passing 6th grade english/grammar tests.

Second.

Can we get a third?

mnosteele52 · Post by **mnosteele52** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 1:30 pm

Roody wrote:Link proving that to be the case in every scenario like you stated?

Breakdown of demographics reveals how black voters swept Obama into White House

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 1:41 pm

mnosteele52 wrote:Breakdown of demographics reveals how black voters swept Obama into White House

Looks like I win. Sava stated it was all the electorate. Thanks for the support.

Of course YoSC tears that argument apart made by Miggs etc.. with this post anyway.

http://forums.speedguide.net/showpost.p ... stcount=15

Hey and what do you know. Obama took 43% of the white vote. Even more proof it wasn't all about his garnering the black vote.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 1:50 pm

Miggs wrote:You're missing the point, my law (Miggs Law) would keep people who don't pay taxes out of the voting booth, I heard somewhere that 50 percent of american households don't pay taxes.
Lets keep the people who don't put in to the system out of the system.

50% seems high, is that including the people that earn too little and thus don't have to pay federal taxes?

Sava700 wrote:The votes cast should have been based on a educational or well thought out reasons based on the ability for him or the other choice to run the country and run it well.

I bet thats the smallest demo.

Brk · Post by **Brk** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 2:58 pm

Education is irrelevant to voting, as people turn their brains off at election time anyway in fealty to their party or ideology.

Based on his previous posts and attitudes, Miggs' suggestion seems less one of ensuring the republic and more one of wanting to keep the "undesirable" elements out of the democratic process -- that is, the underprivileged or poor (cough, minorities) who tend to be "liberals", so that "his side" has a better chance of winning.

No need for any of these Jim Crow-esque laws. If the Republicans can float a charismatic promiser of impossible feats to counter Obama, they'll win. Simple as that.

TonyT · Post by **TonyT** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 3:05 pm

Demographics or not, education or not, the rteally sad thing I was thinking about at my last trip to the supermarket is this:

You know all those "true tales" rags in the checkput area? Ones with headlines like "Michael Jackson's Head Gone Missing", well, there are people who buy these news rags, and the really sad thing is that these people vote.

I guess it's true, "You can fool some of the people all of the time."

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 4:48 pm

Miggs wrote:I believe the only people eligible to vote would be people who are productive members of society, you know, people who work and pay taxes. If you take from the government you shouldn't be able to cast a vote, of course you would vote for someone if they were going to give you something for free. My new law would weed out the dead beats out there.

If you want the GOP to win...here is THE solution. Be an innovator of solutions rather than a sideline criticizer.

America has forgotten how to problem solve at it's most basic form.

JC · Post by JC » Thu Jul 08, 2010 5:57 pm

Miggs wrote:I believe the only people eligible to vote would be people who are productive members of society, you know, people who work and pay taxes. If you take from the government you shouldn't be able to cast a vote, of course you would vote for someone if they were going to give you something for free. My new law would weed out the dead beats out there.

I agree. If you're on welfare, foodstamps, i'm sorry (nutrition assistance) etc.... You should not be allowed to vote. Hell now that I think about it there's not even a RIGHT to vote in a federal election.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 8:12 pm

JC wrote:I agree. If you're on welfare, foodstamps, i'm sorry (nutrition assistance) etc.... You should not be allowed to vote. Hell now that I think about it there's not even a RIGHT to vote in a federal election.

Why not expand it to include all federal government workers because all they are doing is voting for their own job security. Why should DoD workers to include the military be allowed to vote...their paychecks all come from the taxpayers!!!

JC · Post by JC » Thu Jul 08, 2010 8:51 pm

JawZ wrote:Why not expand it to include all federal government workers because all they are doing is voting for their own job security. Why should DoD workers to include the military be allowed to vote...their paychecks all come from the taxpayers!!!

I'm not talking about people who actually work. I'm speaking of the Ghetto queens and those alike on the public take.

JC · Post by JC » Thu Jul 08, 2010 8:53 pm

Why not expand on the right we don't have to vote in federal elections?

Mad_Haggis · Post by **Mad_Haggis** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 10:57 pm

Miggs wrote:I believe the only people eligible to vote would be people who are productive members of society, you know, people who work and pay taxes. If you take from the government you shouldn't be able to cast a vote, of course you would vote for someone if they were going to give you something for free. My new law would weed out the dead beats out there.

I'm with you on this one. Problem is being productive has a finale point. = Get your "Andy Capp"(c) butt off the couch and vote.

Productive people have productive times, then the body just shuts down...btw this is when bipeds have big trouble with spiders?, I know?
I have not got to the max productive point, versus chut down point....to watch a spider walk across my eyeball...but it's getting there?

Rock ON!!

Prey521 · Post by **Prey521** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:11 pm

^ And here I thought that you were actually going somewhere with your post.

Mad_Haggis · Post by **Mad_Haggis** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:18 pm

I cheated on my taxes and I all I got was a lousy job offer from Obama.

I heard 2nite that half of France's Population is employed by the GOV., they are not Greece yet? But on theire way, but not England?

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:21 pm

JC wrote:I'm not talking about people who actually work. I'm speaking of the Ghetto queens and those alike on the public take.

I agree with you but it does have somewhat a hint of a conflict of interest. There are a lot of liberals that view military service as "welfare".

Mad_Haggis · Post by **Mad_Haggis** » Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:30 pm

http://www.metronews.ca/ottawa/life/art ... ant-in-u-k

Days of Unions might be numbered, the gov has the biggest...the posties used to have a big one, but since last years bluff about abolishing letter carriers because of the Internet, they are very quiet now....CUPE is the time story.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Fri Jul 09, 2010 2:47 am

JC wrote:I agree. If you're on welfare, foodstamps, i'm sorry (nutrition assistance) etc.... You should not be allowed to vote. Hell now that I think about it there's not even a RIGHT to vote in a federal election.

So someone thats working, but making so little that they qualify for food stamps, say for paying for dependant care or that has suffered a disability, shouldn't be eligible to vote?

And what about the people that work and make little enough to not pay federal tax, but arent on any assisting programs?

It really sounds like a way to stop the poor from voting.

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:13 am

mnosteele52 wrote:Breakdown of demographics reveals how black voters swept Obama into White House

"Yesterday's surge in black voters, however, only boosted black turnout by two percentage points from 11% to 13%."

I expected that number to be bigger than 2%.

RoundEye · Post by **RoundEye** » Fri Jul 09, 2010 7:08 am

Miggs, I’m wondering what you think about stay at home moms? Dad works and she stays at home and raises the kids. As a whole she is not productive to society, she pays no taxes but raises the kids.

mnosteele52 · Post by **mnosteele52** » Fri Jul 09, 2010 9:00 am

YeOldeStonecat wrote:"Yesterday's surge in black voters, however, only boosted black turnout by two percentage points from 11% to 13%."

I expected that number to be bigger than 2%.

So did I since all I heard during the election was "a record turnout of voters". I know where I live the polls were swamped with voters who usually don't turn out.