Quote:
Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA
Wait a sec, how did THAT get in here?
Let's think about that one for a second m'kay. You want unlimited speech for poll workers in uber-conservative precincts?
He ain't saying it ... but I will.
Anybody that can't handle getting a ^#$%^$#% photo ID isn't remotely fit to cast a ballot. For dogcatcher. And the more of them that don't, the better of the country is / would be. The largest single donwfall of the nation has quite possibly been the expansion of voting "rights" beyond anything the founders intended. (we can argue the criteria, but every vote beyond a small percentage simply brings us to being governed by the lowest common denominator ... universal suffrage is utter insanity)
There. THAT is what is looks like when someone says it's perfectly okay to make it more difficult to register and/or vote.
|
I've always been curious about this since a political science teacher brought it up 25 years ago. However, I have yet to see any real proof of undesirables (poor and/or minority) swaying elections - not without some other group greatly benefiting from it first (farmers, military, corporations, etc).
Unless you are saying that it's not the undesirables voting per se, but the willingness of politicians to pander to them for their own personal gain. For that I agree, because inherent to that is the need to keep "them" needy and dependent.