✔ 最佳答案
I Do,
if there was one that asshole in the white house would not be our president, my wallet would be so much happier!
i'm no longer for an IQ try. yet have you ever taken protective using? Takes a pair of day and clarifies a great sort of issues maximum attendees have under no circumstances heard. those instructions are prevalent to have a minimum bypass-fee with optimum retention of pertinent data taught. We vote on emotion, some distance too often. We vote on assumptions at the same time with: "The president is the main effective guy/woman interior the loose worldwide" (has under one-10th the capacity vested interior the Congress), we vote on the assumption (which i've got considered reported many situations, right here on Y!A) that the "2 party equipment" is an element of Constitutional tests and balances. some thing needs to offer. If we return this incumbent Congress back in 2010, we are executed.
An IQ test sounds good in theory, but it don't work in practice. Who would decide what's on the test? Who would grade it? The same people who are being elected to office. Sounds like a bigtime conflict of interest there. Also, intelligence and wisdom don't always go together.
That being said, I think all these "rock the vote" type drives are a bad idea. Why do we want to encourage EVERYONE to vote? If people don't want to take the time to get informed about the candidates and issues, then I say we should be encouraging them to stay home on election day.
I think a better idea would be to charge like $20 to vote. That would encourage folks to take voting a bit more seriously, and it would give them a stake in the system.
The President should be elected by those who are the most reasonable and informed, not the most intelligent.
It shouldn't matter how smart it the person is.People should worry about whether the person is capable.I don't think that a politician would want to take an IQ test.
A lot of intelligent people do not even know what a parabola is. Since you don't understand this and you don't understand that diversity is what makes our country strong... You should also vote and try to become more knowledgeable. PLEASE!
First words of the Constitution
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Expansion of Rights and Liberties
When the Constitution took effect in 1789, it did not "secure the blessings of liberty" to all people. The expansion of rights and liberties has been achieved over time, as people once excluded from the protections of the Constitution asserted their rights set forth in the Declaration of Independence. These Americans have fostered movements resulting in laws, Supreme Court decisions, and constitutional amendments that have narrowed the gap between the ideal and the reality of American freedom.
At the time of the first Presidential election in 1789, only 6 percent of the population–white, male property owners–was eligible to vote. The Fifteenth Amendment extended the right to vote to former male slaves in 1870; American Indians gained the vote under a law passed by Congress in 1924; and women gained the vote with the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920.
Susan B. Anthony devoted some fifty years of her life to the cause of woman suffrage. After casting her ballot in the 1872 election in her hometown of Rochester, New York, she was arrested, indicted, tried, and convicted for voting illegally. At her two-day trial in June 1873, which she described as "the greatest judicial outrage history has ever recorded," she was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of $100 and court costs.
Anthony took full advantage of the high-profile case to promote the cause of woman suffrage. In a speech delivered repeatedly in 1872–73, she exhorted her listeners to "fight our battle for the ballot–all peaceably, but nevertheless persistently through to complete triumph, when all United States citizens shall be recognized as equals before the law." Women gained the vote with the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution in 1920, fourteen years after Anthony's death.
If you ask this question, that means your iq isn't as high as you expected. 90% chance you will get below average in IQ test. This world is free, everyone is guarantee their rights to vote if they are citizen.
It sounds good in theory, but it would be a nightmare to do it,
and cause more problems than it would solve.
It has been proven tho that neo cons are low IQ and republicans
and etc have to be stupid in order to not see the truth or understand that they are being lied to and manipulated.
Most neocons when polled couldn't seperate bush rhetoric fictions from fact...for instance, thought that we had found wmds
in Iraq when we never did, or, thought that there was a solid connection between 911 and Iraq; there isn't and never was.
They can't get facts straight, they can't think for themselves, so
its obvious they are pretty dumb.
When did they put that into the constitution. I am sure that all of the founders wasn't the brightest light in the sky. I think any citizen that can ought to be able to vote and every citizen ought to have their vote counted.
Not sure.
In theory, yes, there should be because some people are innately unable to make sensible decisions.
In practice, no, because:
1. There's the whole "rights and equality" issue.
2. Where do you set the "IQ border" for suffrage?
3. If you set the "IQ border" too high, then it won't be a democracy anymore.
4. If you set the "IQ border" too low, then it would be redundant because the people with such low IQs won't be enough in number to really sway the electoral outcome.
Finally the "parabola" analogy is dubious. Common sense is more important in voting than remembering the maths you learned at school.
To sarahkegypt: Hehe, not "communist", that's not what the word "communist" means. In fact, in the old days, the Chinese Communists used to go about KILLING the "intelligent and the rich"! (I'm not picking on you though... I only happen to know because China and North Korea are near where I live).
You probably mean "authoritarian" or maybe "dictatorial" do you? Or "oligarchic" (small governing group).
I, personally, think that any candidate for Presidency should be required to take an IQ test once before every term, a piss test regularly, and a polygraph once before every term. As for voters, not everyone has the same priviledges, opportunities, or advantages in their lifetime. A parabola may be simple to a mathematician, but not to a political science major. I think the poli-sci major might have better knowledge on who to vote for President than the mathematician, but that's just me! All I know is if I had a child who was mentally impaired I would do everything in my power to have him/her be accepted and treated like everyone else.
No!
The great thing about America is that we do not look down to people who have mental disabilities. I think EVERYONE should be able to vote! It doesn't matter whether or not they have the mental capacity to or not.
If you want that to be, our country would be corrupted. Only the intelligent, powerful and rich would be able to. That would be almost communist.
I'd like to say that this is an opinion...don't take it extremely seriously.
THAT'S FINE WITH ME BECAUSE MOST NEOCONS WOULDN'T GET TO VOTE.
An I. Q. test should definitely be given to register to vote.
Definitely. While they're at it, they should throw in a common sense test too.
As if a parabola is the mitigating variable in someone's intelligence or not. Knowing Math doesn't mean anything.
In fact I bet there are plenty of people who don't know what a parabola is, but have a better understanding of the cnadidates platforms than people who do.
But I do agree, the elections in our country have become based on one-issue platforms, high visiblity and the sound of voice/looks in general.
Its really pathetic.
BUT HEY with such a lowturn out rate for voting in the first place, you can't really complain or you'll lose those too.
Also my history teacher in middle school had mild down syndrome. He was very intelligent and denying him the right to vote is just ludicrous.
No IQ test!
But there should be a reading test, if they can't read English then they should not be allowed to vote!!
personally id like to see Bush take an IQ test..and see how that monkey boy does
I believe that there should be an IQ test in order to contest for President
down syndrome people are smarter than George W. Bush
THAT is a difficult position to take, and borders on rights issues
there is no easy answer for this one, and its a valid question......
I do! People should know the facts, or what someone stands for. They shouldn't just blindly vote along party lines because they feel they should follow along race etc.
John Skerry needs to take an IQ test too, his grades in college were even worse than Bush's. So I guess we have the best man in office now. The voters were right again.
You should definitely not be allowed to vote.
