Current Events — HabitableZone

Current Events » in reply to Re: Philosophical not-so-niceties

Re: Philosophical niceties
Robert — (archived)

<An aside:

The little dig at the end about "those people" is an obvious attempt to paint conservatives as bone-deep racists.

This is starting to chap my ass a bit.



'Fraid not, Tom. I meant specifically "the others", those who hold beliefs different from yours. Intellectual xenophobia. Sorry you wasted a perfectly good diatribe.

The key point you're missing is that with anything less than universal sufferage, somebody gets to set the criteria for the right to vote, and therefore has the power, and will use it, to stack the deck politically.

we have a large pool of voters that, to put it mildly, are not exactly "informed."

Define "informed". Reading the Wall Street Journal? Would you concede that somebody who reads the NY or LA Times, WashPost, CNN, et al might also be informed, even if you don't agree with the perspective? If the answer is no, how can you defend yourself against a charge of arrogance?

a desire to be sure voters at least have the intelligence of a boiled clam....



screwed up votes--votes by people who couldn't figure out the simplest procedures--were automatically assumed during the conflict by both parties to be likely votes for Democrats, which says something right there.



Your thesis, taken as a whole, demonstrates my point: If it were up to you, you'd gerrymander by demographics. Nobody, liberal or conservative, can be trusted with that power.

The Democratic target voter seems to be someone who is easy to fool, or cheap to buy.

Oh, I dunno, as I recall the last election, Republicans sold their votes for $300-600. Now we know the market price of a Republican vote, though it seems awfully cheap to me.

--Robert

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (45 posts)