Obama wants "Cousin Pookie" to vote

[RavenSky]

Anyhow, what would be wrong about encouraging the cousins Pookie to get out and vote?

Because people like Pookie are almost certainly not informed to know anything about the elections you want them to participate in. You can be poor and still informed, so it's not about socioeconomic status, but if you have to be dragged to the polls what are the chances you even know who or what's on the ballot and have formed an opinion about either?
I do not want Pookies to vote, just like I don't want Badgers or Skinny Petes to vote either.

Did I miss the companion thread you started wherein you bitched about the Tea Party dingbats voting?

 

[dismal]

Math.

So no one's vote matters? Your math only works if no one votes. Everybody who votes is stupid for doing so?

Yeah, pretty much. You nailed it.

I think your position is more of this.: "I don’t want everybody to vote…our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down." - Paul Weyrich, Republican strategist

ETA: Apparently he thinks every vote matters.

Nope. Right the first time.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Math.

So no one's vote matters? Your math only works if no one votes. Everybody who votes is stupid for doing so?

I think your position is more of this.: "I don’t want everybody to vote…our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down." - Paul Weyrich, Republican strategist

ETA: Apparently he thinks every vote matters.

This train passed by before. It leads to no where. Do yourself a favor and stay on the platform.

 

[Earl IV]

We really need to be careful about this whole voter registration thing.

I mean, registration is the first step toward confiscation... right?

 

[Sabine Grant]

Anyhow, what would be wrong about encouraging the cousins Pookie to get out and vote?

Because people like Pookie are almost certainly not informed to know anything about the elections you want them to participate in. You can be poor and still informed, so it's not about socioeconomic status, but if you have to be dragged to the polls what are the chances you even know who or what's on the ballot and have formed an opinion about either?
I do not want Pookies to vote, just like I don't want Badgers or Skinny Petes to vote either.

And which organized system are you envisioning should be set in place to eliminate from the right to vote US citizens you deem unfit to vote?

 

[Keith&Co.]

Because people like Pookie are almost certainly not informed to know anything about the elections you want them to participate in. You can be poor and still informed, so it's not about socioeconomic status, but if you have to be dragged to the polls what are the chances you even know who or what's on the ballot and have formed an opinion about either?
I do not want Pookies to vote, just like I don't want Badgers or Skinny Petes to vote either.

And which organized system are you envisioning should be set in place to eliminate from the right to vote US citizens you deem unfit to vote?

Probably reset to landed, educated white men, our historical voting heritage.

 

[dismal]

So no one's vote matters? Your math only works if no one votes. Everybody who votes is stupid for doing so?

I think your position is more of this.: "I don’t want everybody to vote…our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down." - Paul Weyrich, Republican strategist

ETA: Apparently he thinks every vote matters.

This train passed by before. It leads to no where. Do yourself a favor and stay on the platform.

Basic math and logic are not very effective around here.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

This train passed by before. It leads to no where. Do yourself a favor and stay on the platform.

Basic math and logic are not very effective around here.

There is no math, it is counting. And your logic is sound if you are a sociopath. Democracy means everyone has a voice. Means your individual voice will get drowned out by all the others. If you are a sociopath, I can understand why that would bother you so much.

 

[dismal]

Basic math and logic are not very effective around here.

There is no math, it is counting. And your logic is sound if you are a sociopath. Democracy means everyone has a voice. Means your individual voice will get drowned out by all the others. If you are a sociopath, I can understand why that would bother you so much.

None of your emotional pleas change the reality involved. The odds of Cousin Pookie's vote changing anything approximate that of him being mauled by both a polar bear and a regular bear on his way to the polling place.

 

[Derec]

Did I miss the companion thread you started wherein you bitched about the Tea Party dingbats voting?

I do not recall Tea Party politicians ever suggesting one drag one's lazy, slacker (and possibly drug-addicted) relatives to the polls even if they really do not want to, calling them things like "cousin Skinny Pete" or "cousin Badger".
There is a lot to attack Teabaggers on but this isn't one of them.

 

[Derec]

What a democratic view.

I happen to think an informed citizenry is essential to a healthy democracy.
Dragging somebody to the polls who has no inclination to vote and probably doesn't know Obama from the black guy in Allstate commercials (he once saw him as president on 24) just to make up (the presumably reliably big-D Democratic in Pookie's case) numbers doesn't strike me as particularly small-d democratic.

 

[Derec]

And which organized system are you envisioning should be set in place to eliminate from the right to vote US citizens you deem unfit to vote?

I am partial to having to answer a few questions from the citizenship test.
"Who is the vice president of the United States"
"How many US Senators are there?"
"How long is a US Senator's term?"

Things like that. If you can't answer those you frankly do not deserve to have a say in how the country is run.

Not very likely to ever pass, but until then we at least have self-selection: Pookies and Badgers tend to stay at home because they are too lazy and I'd rather have them on the couch than voting no matter which party they reflexively choose.

 

[Sabine Grant]

What a democratic view.

I happen to think an informed citizenry is essential to a healthy democracy.

Again, which organized system would you envision set in place to eliminate US citizens from the right to vote you deem to be incompatible with "an informed citizenry"?

ETA : just saw your reply posted one minute before my post.

I am partial to having to answer a few questions from the citizenship test.
"Who is the vice president of the United States"
"How many US Senators are there?"
"How long is a US Senator's term?"
Things like that. If you can't answer those you frankly do not deserve to have a say in how the country is run.

I guess the silver lining of such testing is that there would be a substantial number of legal immigrants and legal permanent residents in the US who would actually not only correctly answer those questions but would also be able to summarize which specific philosophers of the Period Of Enlightenment inspired the Founding Fathers, why the separation of the 3 powers and its origin, the content of the Bill of Rights, how many Amendments to the US Constitution, what was the intent behind the Establishment Clause and why, how many Departments in the Federal Administration, what is the role of the Electoral College, which 2 bodies form the Us Congress and what is the difference between House and Senate etc... and many more questions which would in fact test "informed citizenry".

The solution to promote an "informed citizenry" is not to eliminate US citizens from the right to vote based on how informed they are, but to establish mandated classes on Civic Instruction in your schools. Making them a mandated and separate from Social Studies curriculum item from like 9th to 12th grade.

Not very likely to ever pass, but until then we at least have self-selection: Pookies and Badgers tend to stay at home because they are too lazy.

Because they do not understand how important voting is. That misguided sense can be reversed for your future generations if Civic Instruction becomes in your schools a mandated curriculum item and under the conditions I mentioned above.

 

[Derec]

Well, there's your problem. You seem to want to pick and choose who gets to vote. I want everyone to vote.

At the very least those already disinclined to vote should be let be.

At the very least I think Cousin Pookie, which simply refers to a lazy but endearing relative (not a crack addict),

Not a crack addict?

can be counted on to know the general difference between R and D, as well as which party would benefit him more if elected.

More likely he is to vote the way those that drag him off the couch tell him to.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

There is no math, it is counting. And your logic is sound if you are a sociopath. Democracy means everyone has a voice. Means your individual voice will get drowned out by all the others. If you are a sociopath, I can understand why that would bother you so much.

None of your emotional pleas change the reality involved.

You seriously need to get with someone to explain to you what an "emotional plea" is.

The odds of Cousin Pookie's vote changing anything approximate that of him being mauled by both a polar bear and a regular bear on his way to the polling place.

Except that Obama wasn't asking one person to get their typically non-voting relative to vote. He was asking hundreds, thousands to get their non-voting relatives to vote. In the aggregate, it makes a big difference. Ask Norm Coleman or Al Gore.

 

[KeepTalking]

At the very least I think Cousin Pookie, which simply refers to a lazy but endearing relative (not a crack addict),

Not a crack addict?

Correct. The term 'Cousin Pookie' does not equate to 'crack addict', regardless of whether or not Chris Rock portrayed a character named 'Pookie' (not Cousin Pookie) who was a crack addict. It has a specific meaning outside of that context.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Not a crack addict?

Correct. The term 'Cousin Pookie' does not equate to 'crack addict', regardless of whether or not Chris Rock portrayed a character named 'Pookie' (not Cousin Pookie) who was a crack addict. It has a specific meaning outside of that context.

But that doesn't matter because Pookie means crack addict because of a movie! Cinema trumps all.

 

[Keith&Co.]

More likely he is to vote the way those that drag him off the couch tell him to.

Um, is that any different than any other election? Many of my relatives vote a straight party ticket.
Except for the ones that vote a straight gender ticket.
And of course, Cousin Kallisto who puts 'Mickey Mouse' as a write in candidate every chance she gets. Or maybe she just says that to drive her father to pull his hair out....

Near as i can tell, a significant amount of politics is to support a 'vote as you're told' ticket.

 

[laughing dog]

What a democratic view.

I happen to think an informed citizenry is essential to a healthy democracy.
Dragging somebody to the polls who has no inclination to vote and probably doesn't know Obama from the black guy in Allstate commercials (he once saw him as president on 24) just to make up (the presumably reliably big-D Democratic in Pookie's case) numbers doesn't strike me as particularly small-d democratic.

You need to bone up on the meaning of democracy.
I see no reason why someone who is informed and batshit crazy and inclined to vote is a better voter than someone who is not informed and less inclined to vote.

 

[dismal]

None of your emotional pleas change the reality involved.

You seriously need to get with someone to explain to you what an "emotional plea" is.

The odds of Cousin Pookie's vote changing anything approximate that of him being mauled by both a polar bear and a regular bear on his way to the polling place.

Except that Obama wasn't asking one person to get their typically non-voting relative to vote. He was asking hundreds, thousands to get their non-voting relatives to vote. In the aggregate, it makes a big difference. Ask Norm Coleman or Al Gore.

See what you did there? You did not make a logical case that Pookie should vote.

You shifted it to a discussion of whether someone should convince hundreds or thousands of relatives to vote.

I assume you are aware these are two different and entirely independent things.

One of them is what we were discussing. Not the one you tried to shift to though.