Involving them doesn't mean estranging them by forcing them to jump through additional hoops to qualify to vote, despite already being natural born US citizens. The idea is to get more younger voters, not less because they're being told them have to prove their allegiance by taking a test. This is why Vivek has no clue what he's talking about. Not only would this be farcically unimplementable, its a terrible, cynical idea that is only being put out there as red meat for the MAGA base.
2024 U.S. Elections | Trump v Harris
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
Involving them doesn't mean estranging them by forcing them to jump through additional hoops to qualify to vote, despite already being natural born US citizens. The idea is to get more younger voters, not less because they're being told them have to prove their allegiance by taking a test. This is why Vivek has no clue what he's talking about. Not only would this be farcically unimplementable, its a terrible, cynical idea that is only being put out there as red meat for the MAGA base.
Why should the younger voters have to take a civics test to vote? The older right wing media MAGA people that watch Fox news all day are the ones that are uninformed. They still think the last election is stolen and Pence should have just "made Trump" the winner. How are young voters any less informed or have less right to vote without hoops than these people?
The clear reason for the proposal is to discourage younger voters who are going to be more likely to vote for more left leaning policies. They arent even subtle about it. instead of reaching out to those young voters lets just raise the age limit.
Exactly what they try to do in red states to suppress black and brown votes. Give them less polling place options. Make them stand in hours long lines, mail in votes more difficult etc.
The clear reason for the proposal is to discourage younger voters who are going to be more likely to vote for more left leaning policies. They arent even subtle about it. instead of reaching out to those young voters lets just raise the age limit.
Exactly what they try to do in red states to suppress black and brown votes. Give them less polling place options. Make them stand in hours long lines, mail in votes more difficult etc.
I think only people who like Vivek should have to take the test.
Ultimately everyone should, but we have to start somewhere. Therefore only you.
I get that bit, but involving people who aren't voting doesn't mean making it harder for them to vote by forcing them to take a test that other voters don't have to take is a logical solution. Why is this basic fact so hard to accept. ?
Probably gives weight that that America First policy doesn't really have a say in bigger picture.
Plus given that, this translates into reduction in armed forces (read unemployment) and that a big chunk of armed forces and veterans tend to vote GOP, it's a no win situation for them. Add in that states like Texas and Florida are the some of the top 10 recipients of the defense spending, I'm sure their senators would not support this.
Imagine being this bowled over by vapid, superficial, yet ultimately dangerous populism.
We already screwed the pooch in 2016 with a 'populist' candidate who won.
We already screwed the pooch in 2016 with a 'populist' candidate who won.
Wait there's someone that actually said he wants 18 year olds to take a civics test in order to be able to vote and says, "you have to start somewhere"?
Also why is "non-political" somehow a boon for people in an election (aside from the fact that running for president in and of itself makes you political)? Do you call a non-plumbing plummer if your faucet breaks? Being a politician is an actual job for which you need actual competences. I know populists have made it seem (for years now) that politics means debating people on Twitter, err I mean X, and producing a lot of Gotcha! moments on live TV, but the actual job of being an administrator has nothing to do with this. Being elected is not the actual goal of a politician. It's making policy.
Having said that, a basic civics test is a great idea for anyone who doesn't see through the fact that people like Vivek Ramaswamy, Donald Trump or JFK's nutbag son are not in it for the improvement of their country, but for the attention, adulation and glamour heaped on them by people who are too fecking thick to realize they're being conned. Really, it does my head in that there are actual existing people, with allegedly functioning brains that don't see that these people don't give a flying feck if their voters all die in a fire as long as they are elected. Hell a civics test before running for president would be a good idea as well, as I'm 99% sure that I know more about the process of how the US was founded than Trump (and Vivek with his, the constitution won us the revolution rubbish).
Ok, this helped my bloodpressure go down slightly.
Also why is "non-political" somehow a boon for people in an election (aside from the fact that running for president in and of itself makes you political)? Do you call a non-plumbing plummer if your faucet breaks? Being a politician is an actual job for which you need actual competences. I know populists have made it seem (for years now) that politics means debating people on Twitter, err I mean X, and producing a lot of Gotcha! moments on live TV, but the actual job of being an administrator has nothing to do with this. Being elected is not the actual goal of a politician. It's making policy.
Having said that, a basic civics test is a great idea for anyone who doesn't see through the fact that people like Vivek Ramaswamy, Donald Trump or JFK's nutbag son are not in it for the improvement of their country, but for the attention, adulation and glamour heaped on them by people who are too fecking thick to realize they're being conned. Really, it does my head in that there are actual existing people, with allegedly functioning brains that don't see that these people don't give a flying feck if their voters all die in a fire as long as they are elected. Hell a civics test before running for president would be a good idea as well, as I'm 99% sure that I know more about the process of how the US was founded than Trump (and Vivek with his, the constitution won us the revolution rubbish).
Ok, this helped my bloodpressure go down slightly.
Last edited:
Bolded one -> that is for the vast majority of countries. For example, even today, anybody from any part of the world can become a citizen of any European country except Vatican.
With the rest to your nonsense post, why not doing then such a test for everyone instead of only for 18-15 group age (whom as a total coincidence, vote overwhelmingly Democrat)?
You just said "government by definition is built on the concept of socialism". That is complete nonsense. Why should you get to vote when you make such fundamental civic mistakes?
Do you really not see the issue here? This would be a return to the voting laws of the Jim Crow era, just in an attempt to exclude young people instead if black people. Those laws were also justified in exactly the same way you're doing here. "It's just a test". "Why should anyone who proves themselves ignorant be allowed to vote".
I can't believe we're re-enacting the script to fecking Starship Troopers here. Out of all the ridiculous things people have said in the CE, this might be the weirdest.
It's sad though, that 90s satire is now mostly a political reality. Though I imagine if you show the movie to a modern republican they will entirely miss the satire and judge it as utopia instead.
The only way it'd remotely work is if you tested everyone. Nobody can vote unless they take the test. Otherwise it's targeted voter suppression.
See how well it goes down well you tell people they have to take a test and pass it to vote.
I agree that you need more informed voters, this isn't the way unless you do everyone. Also voting for the party that does everything it can to ruin education and create more uninformed voters is not the way to get things done.
Wait - which party is this ? Somehow from your posting I don’t think you mean the one that is actually actively banning books
I was highlighting how it doesn't work and isn't fair and is clearly a voter suppression tactic.
I am on about the one that is actively banning books.
It's sad though, that 90s satire is now mostly a political reality. Though I imagine if you show the movie to a modern republican they will entirely miss the satire and judge it as utopia instead.
Republicans think Rage Against The Machine are on their side. They think Born in the U.S.A and Fortunate Son are patriotic. They think "Every Breath You Take" isn't about stalking. Okay, most people think that last one.
Last edited:
Ah mb - reading on the fly and merged your message with kings
You had me there for a second
The primary reason you don't willingly back shrinking the size of the electorate is that any political leader willing to do so will inevitably go further when given the opportunity.
No way. Some low level cabinet position at best. Sane thing would be to go with another Pence type for Trump to shore up the Evangelical vote again. Some MAGA "intellectuals" want Gabbard as running mate so they can claim theirs to be the unity ticket.
I mean, that's literally what would happen.
That's precisely what it is. Republicans are facing a math problem in the US in that each year, a few million immigrants become citizens who can vote, and several million young people reach voting age. Both of these demographics tend to vote Dem, so if you can create additional hurdles for them to participate, it would obviously reduce the Republican deficit. This is after all a party that hasn't won the popular vote in 20 years, and they know the only way they can remain competitive in elections is to reduce voter turnout among groups who traditionally vote Dem.
Yet somehow the polls will have us believe that Trump will definitely contend the popular vote in 24.
Its going to be like 22, where the pollsters were dead wrong, they really should get around to update their methods, but they wont.
This is why pollsters need to be all sent onto unemployment. I can live by using statistics for studies on something that have happened in the past, not for some bullshit projection.
National polls are pretty useless this far out, especially given all the variables with Trump's legal cases thrown in. If the Rs are viewed as close today, its more so a result of independents being underwhelmed at the thought of reelecting an 80 year old Biden. The usual swing states will be very close.
I mean, Hillary was incredibly unpopular, and still beat him easily in the popular vote.
Of course, the EC will be close yet again though.
Last edited:
If you don't know that the GOP is actively trying to suppress votes, then you aren't paying attention. I suggest reading up on this. Anything that adds a barrier to voting can and has been used as a tool of voter suppression. I'd suggest learning the history of voter suppression before commenting.
But ultimately the problem is who are you or Trump or Vivek to determine who is voting ignorantly? Who are you or Vivek to decide that some arcane fact from 200+ years ago is more important than someone knowing that climate change is real and they aren't voting for someone who actively denies it (like Vivek calling it a hoax)? Or an 18-year-old girl that knows she doesn't like the GOP's efforts to restrict abortion and that's enough for her to vote how she does. Who the feck cares if that person doesn't know the exact date the Constitution was adopted? That trivia doesn't affect their lives but they know the GOP's policies that affect their lives and they don't like them. From my perspective, the diehard Trump voters I've seen on video in many of these threads are lightyears more ignorant than the average 18-25-year-old so why not insist on everyone taking a test? The reason why not is voting is supposed to embody democratic ideals (technically, US is a representative republic) and your test simply doesn't embody this ideal.
Then you have the problem of who determines what even goes on such a silly test. I'm sure Marjorie Taylor Greene's idea of what should be on a "civics test" is very different than AOC's idea of what should be on a "civics" test. It can very much be used, not just as a tool of suppression, but a tool to shape views and prime people to vote a certain way. Anyway, it's just a moronic idea that we don't even need to waste this much time discussing as there is no valid argument for it. For instance, based on your posts, I don't think you have enough understanding of history to deserve the privilege of voting. That should illustrate the entire problem with your idea. You might think 18-year-olds don't deserve to vote. I don't think you have proven that you deserve to vote. This is why no one should be determining this. Every citizen deserves the right to vote. Period.
You should speak for yourself on the bolded part and not say we. Maybe spend some time reading through the Cop thread here and realize that many of us here do not agree with your personal opinion that certain jobs should get special treatment. They shouldn't. A teacher, a plumber, and a homeless person all deserve the same equal access to voting as a cop or military grunt. Always.
Last edited:
You guys are a special breed; if you dislike a source, you tend to outright dismiss it as propaganda. It can be quite tiresome. Could you please specify what, in particular, you find to be propaganda in that video?
Onto your question - Newsom has been recently campaigning in Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi and Florida, criticizing GOP at every stop. But why? He holds no political power in those states. His travels could be seen as a dereliction of his duties as the governor of California. His mandate is to focus on addressing the issues afflicting CA, of which there are many. Stuff like this. Or this. Or state surplus swinging from a $100B surplus to a $22.5B deficit. Not to mention homelessness, housing, struggling schools, a rising homicide rate, a crumbling public transportation, - and exhibit 2 - you know basic shit that it's on his mandate to handle.
Newsom needs to focus on California many problems, not the problems of the Deep South. And unless he can offer solution to rising rents, rising homelessness, rising crime and disorder, and failing schools, he doesn’t really deserve a shot on the national stage.
Oh. I guess we were wrong to give you the benefit of the doubt. I didn't really think it needed to be said, but people don't owe you their time. If you present a known far-right rag as your source, nobody is under any obligation to do anything more than laugh at your choice in sources.
Over half a million immigrants take this civic test every year to gain voting rights in our country. (2022 had a record 1 million people take this test and become citizens). Is it voter suppression then to ask immigrants seeking naturalization to take this test. These immigrants understand the way of american governance and politics better and are hence more informed to vote. They value it much better. There are bunch of voters in a southern college who claim that abortion rights were taken away by the Biden government because it happened in his term, without understanding what the supreme court does or the three branches of government in US. So you are saying they should keep listening to tucker useless carlson and don melon for all their answers and vote.
With all the rise in social media what has truly gone up is the epidemic of misinformation and this is particularly true for 18-25 voters most of whom consider voting as some outside thing of no interest. Vivek's recommendation for civics test is for all ages, but its harder to start there and insists to start at 18. While it might seem he is planning on denying young voters who vote for democrats but a deeper truth is it has no merits on his own election campaign (he is not going to benefit from it) and this voting block is the least voting block in US, hardly election swinging voter base. And if in case such a test happens, it is highly likely the most informed voters wont pick a lot of sound bite politicians like Trump. I don't see why everybody is up in arms over this. There are a bunch of people taking it as some kind of personal affront, makes no sense.
GOP is actively trying to suppress voters by making it difficult for black voters to turn out and vote, reducing the number of voting booths and polls etc, voter id, no holiday etc. Nobody is denying it and has nothing to do with what Vivek is saying here regarding young voters and the civic test.
With all the rise in social media what has truly gone up is the epidemic of misinformation and this is particularly true for 18-25 voters most of whom consider voting as some outside thing of no interest. Vivek's recommendation for civics test is for all ages, but its harder to start there and insists to start at 18. While it might seem he is planning on denying young voters who vote for democrats but a deeper truth is it has no merits on his own election campaign (he is not going to benefit from it) and this voting block is the least voting block in US, hardly election swinging voter base. And if in case such a test happens, it is highly likely the most informed voters wont pick a lot of sound bite politicians like Trump. I don't see why everybody is up in arms over this. There are a bunch of people taking it as some kind of personal affront, makes no sense.
GOP is actively trying to suppress voters by making it difficult for black voters to turn out and vote, reducing the number of voting booths and polls etc, voter id, no holiday etc. Nobody is denying it and has nothing to do with what Vivek is saying here regarding young voters and the civic test.
So this Republican politician trying to do something that will undoubtedly heavily depress the vote of young adults has nothing to do with the fact that young adults largely vote for the Democrats?
I wont say it has nothing to do with it. He is taking a bet that once young voters understand and show interest in politics and value their vote, they will be much more convinced to vote for policies over media narratives and misinformation. He is hoping there would be greater voter turn out and their votes will truly reflect policy positions without being fooled by vain idealism.
Why do you keep railing on about young people whilst ignoring the huge effect misinformation has had on older generations that aren't as schooled in sifting through bullshit on the internet?
The average boomer hasn't got a fecking clue how to deal with that. Gen X struggles as well. Older people using the internet and sharing clear misinformation through Facebook and in social circles is more than just a meme. Not to mention the fact that their traditional media sources are still believed in full until they go against their own particular preferences (example being Trump fans moving to OANN/Newsmax once he started slating Fox having believed the likes of Tucker, Hannity and Ingraham for decades)
The two aren't related. Immigrants taking an informal test as part of the citizenship process has nothing to do with people who are already citizens. The latter don't have to prove anything since they already have all the rights of being citizens. Vivek is simply making this stuff up because he knows it will play well with the xenophobic MAGA base, so he can move up in the polls without offending Trump or his voters. The same situation applies to his farcical foreign policy on Ukraine and Taiwan. He's inventing it as he goes.
Undeniably true. As susceptible young people are to bad sources on the internet, they're the ones who actually grew up with this challenge. Basically anything before Millennials and a few Gen X'ers are much less well-equipped to figure out when they are being manipulated.
Im all about testing voters, but all of us, not a target group
Ahem - it's 20% of the federal spending
That’s combining it with DHS. It’s about 800b in 25.5 trillion dollar economy.
Lets get to the crux of it Raoul. What is it that the immigrants have to prove through the civic test that the born citizens don't have to (or already have as you put it)? Rather, what are these civic tests making immigrants prove? Think about it - Is it loyalty to the nation? nah.. In simple terms, a basic non-partisan understanding of the founding ideals of the nation and how its governance actually works. Knowing this must be the first step for any citizen in any democratic country to vote.
I think its entitlement manifesting in the form of ignorance amongst many of our citizens coat-tailing it on their previous generations hard work in coming and building this nation that taking the same set of civil rights test that a current immigrant must take to have a basic understanding of the nation's governance (there is nothing partisan in it) prior to gaining the right to vote, is somehow considered voter suppression and you have few voices here in this forum who so wish to project me as some kind of extremist that they can readily cancel. Let me tell you this, Vivek is absolutely right about the civic test. He proposed it for all citizens but wants to start with youngsters because its the practical start. Remember this age group 18-25 is the least voting age group in the entire country with little to no interest in knowing anything other than tik-tok videos.
What does any of this have to do with the original point ? You keep citing that young people vote the least (which is true), but then proceed to advocate for a policy that would result in them voting far less. People already don’t want to leave the house to vote which is why mail in voting has become popular. Do you think people are going to leave their homes to take a test in advance of elections just so they are allowed to vote?
At the end of the day, people are looking for convenience to make things easier. All what you’re proposing would do is make it much harder for one swath of the population to vote. Never mind that it would never be implementable, it’s simply a deeply flawed and cynical idea.
Last edited: