0 votes

Test to take before voting

I got an idea. We need to start up a push to have a voting test implemented. Locally, State wide, and Nationally.

It would be simple. A few questions.
The questions would change based on the election in question. (the answers are the current local office holders)

1. Who is your current ________? (senator, city councilman, dog catcher, etc.)

2. Who is the current Vice President of the US?

3. What year was the declaration of independence signed?

4. What county/city is this?

get 3 out of 4 you pass. miss 2 and you are too stupid and ignorant to screw up things for the rest of us.

I mean simple questions, but questions that show that the folks voting at least have a clue as to something about what is going on. Nothing about who they are voting for, nothing that is tricky, just something to make them at least ask the next guy in line something that should be common knowledge.

We have enough problems with the voting machines picking the winner of every election. At least we should make it harder by having a voter base that at least knows who is currently in office and who is on the ballot before they walk into the booth.

I for one am getting tired of seeing an election with 1% of the locations reporting and then all night long the percentages per candidate never change. You mean to tell me that Beverly Hills votes the same way as Compton?

Well, with the brain dead electorate that we have I am leaning toward believing it. It may not be the machines, it may just be the dumb ass people that don't have a clue who is even running before they go in the booth.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I would be game for some

I would be game for some important questions pertaining to government and history. The main problem is who decides what questions are to be on the test.



Freedom is NOT free!

3 questions about

candidates or the country and 3 about American Idol. If they get more right about American Idol they can't vote lol



Freedom is NOT free!

Jay Leno did some street

Jay Leno did some street interviews where he asked people a variety of political and often really simple questions. The people failed in a big way. I remember some professor who said we won our independence in 1922!

If the people are tested then there will probably only be us Ron Paul supporters who are voting plus maybe a few million others. ;-)

It makes a lot of sense, though. People who do not know even the most simplest things regarding our country sure can mess things up in a big way due to their not paying attention to what is actually going on.


Fear of failure potential embarrassment wil keep people away.


Free includes debt-free!

this is my thought as well

if we take a more passive approach, (i.e. passing out literature when people register to vote) there would be no compulsory aspect, and we will inevitably educate more people without discouraging them from actually voting. sure this is what we do already, we just have to do more of it.

ummm i think they tried this

against the blacks under the jim crow laws

personally #1 is really hard for me (lol whos my local coucilman idk)
the rest are a piece of cake

but bad idea

Actually most of the Jim Crow stuff was in retaliation

to the radical republicans denying the vote to the people of the south during reconstruction. You know the stuff that we never were taught in school.

All we have ever been told about voting "test" is how they discriminate against folks.

They question we should be asking ourselves is, do they really want to protect people or do they want to protect themselves by insuring that they have an ignorant voting populace.

We got to quit being so PC about things, that we just agree with whatever BS the government tells us is for our own good.

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*


If you don't know how to read or write, you should be allowed to vote?

If you don't know what the hell you are voting for, you should be allowed to vote?

If you have to depend on someone else to explain who you should vote for while not knowing if that person is telling the truth, you should vote or be allowed to vote?

If you are only voting on what makes you feel good and not on an intelligent critically thought out decision, you should be allowed to vote?
"never underestimate the power of fools in large numbers."

No blind people will be reading this.

Unintended consequences?

Free includes debt-free!

If you have nothing to loose ( property etc. ) or have given

nothing to the country ( military, public service etc. ) should you be allowed to vote ?

Look at the trip we have with Obama...if the above formula were to have been applied...he would not have been elected. He is the president of "you owe me" segment of the population...the "I want my gov. check group.

Real "independent" people are few and far between. After years of social formation and conditioning, to be "free" of dependance and able to "have a mind" is a rare and to many a "scarry" thing.

Democracy is a lie...

Discover Costa Rica

Knowing how to read and write has nothing to do with

intelligence. I have known some men and women that couldn't read and could only write their name that were smarter than phd holders. And could build anything you could think of, and ran extremely successful businesses.

Having a knowledge of what is going on around you and intelligence can't be measured completely by reading and writing.

There are plenty of people that can read and write that rely on others to tell them what to think and do.

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

Nice answer. So in order for

Nice answer. So in order for people who can't read your 4 questions, a special booth with a recording of the questions has to be made on account they can't read the questions. That's a good solution. Right?

You don't have poll workers where you vote?

Even here in Alabamastan, we have to show them somebodies water bill or the tab off of our subscription to tv guide before they hand us the ballot.

Quit trying to make stuff complicated for the sake of your argument.

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

But, a booth with a recording

But, a booth with a recording would be faster, wouldn't it?

What argument? I just asked a few questions. BTW, I do agree with you on your OP.

i understand the purpose of

i understand the purpose of the test, i just don't like it. we should be encouraging people to be educated voters, not discouraging people from voting (which is what this would do)


How would getting folks educated about things discourage them from being educated?

I don't want to be a smart ass, but I am getting damn tired of folks just spouting off words and not backing any of it up with logic, facts, or research.

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

i dont think flashing a short

i dont think flashing a short quiz at the polls is going get people educated. it will just turn away the uneducated and they will never vote or pay attention again. they need to be educated BEFORE they hit the polls. perhaps voter registration should include the quiz. i don't necessarily agree with the compulsory aspect of your idea, but i agree with it's intention.

But isn't that

what ACORN did to help get Obama elected. Even though it was MISinformation they were being educated with?

See below

If they feel the need to vote to be civic minded, then they should feel the need to know what they are voting for.

I don't want to argue, (especially with someone that agrees with my intent), but we have let not only the government screw us, but we have let ourselves screw us.

If you had a private enterprise you wouldn't let folks that worked for the competition or didn't even know what business you were in decide your new product line. This is just basic common sense.

So why is it somehow wrong to apply the same common sense to our government?

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

Terrible idea

Terrible idea


What is terrible about showing that a person has just the bare minimum of knowledge about what they are doing?

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

I understand your frustration

I understand your frustration with the masses of people that are obviously ignorant of the issues, believe me I feel the same, but implementing a competency test is not only not fair but morally divisive. The only true cure for this gross ineptitude of understanding is by changing mindsets and explaining the issues.

How is it not fair?

Same questions to everyone. How is it morally divisive? Is it not moral to know what is going on before voicing your opinion?

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

Alright, who sets the level

Alright, who sets the level of competence in order to have the privilege to vote? The moral question is those that have not had the same level of education may then be unable to express their vote. They may understand the issues perfectly, but who decides whether that person is competent or not?

Your reading a little too much into it

Go back and look at the questions. My whole point is if folks feel civic minded enough to vote, then they should be civic minded enough to know whats going on.

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

Not to seem argumentative,

Not to seem argumentative, but I think you're not reading enough into what you're proposing and the consequences that could result. You do see my point though, right?

Okay, I'll bite please explain to me the consequences of having

people prove they have a clue about what they are doing before they do it.

Please explain to me how continuing to let the clueless steer the ship makes sense, vs. going out on a limb and maybe letting the ones that know at least what ocean we are even in, steer the ship.

People have the natural right to be ignorant, they don't have the natural right to injure others due to their own self imposed ignorance.

Yes, there are people that can't even answer what city they are currently in that show up to vote, please tell me how this is beneficial to society and how it should be allowed to continue.

Consider this.
You own a company that makes brake pads, you are going to have a design meeting to design a new way to make brake pads. Do you think it is more prudent to look into the knowledge of your engineers and make sure that at a bare minimum they know they are at the brake plant instead of the packing plant next door?

Or, so you don't offend anyone, to just trust that they really are engineers and know that they aren't next door at the packing plant.

Well, the car may stop and it may not.

Our government is a car with faulty brakes, cause we as a people weren't smart enough to make sure the folks we had designing the brakes (voting) even knew where they were during the design.

We didn't want to offend anyone, or make anyone uncomfortable, so we just decided that if you want to vote 3 or 30 times it is okay, we won't check your ID to see if you already voted.

We didn't want to offend anyone, we didn't have a poll worker even ask "what city are you currently in?" or "who is the current Representative in your district?"

No we would rather have a bunch of folks that aren't offended continue to give us a car and a government that has faulty brakes.

Well, that's okay cause they didn't even know they were at the brake plant or the packing plant, they thought they were ordering a Whopper at Burger King anyway.

Why continue to keep doing the same things that continue to screw us?

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*

You're right...let's have

You're right...let's have people's voices silenced due to some arbitrary questions that some bureaucrat thought up. Do you really think just because you know the answer to what city you're in makes you more knowledgeable on anything? I agree there should be measures on voter fraud. Where I vote they do check for that stuff. Sounds like a local issue to me. If you're that concerned with others being so much more ignorant than you are, then do your part by informing neighbors, friends, family, strangers, etc. Imposing a mandatory test which dictates whether one can exercise a basic American privilege does not sound like liberty to me. You don't change people's ideas by not allowing them to express their opinions; or do you think just because someone doesn't know who the dog catcher is means they don't deserve to have an opinion?