I understand your reasoning, but are you willing to trade for a popular and maybe a well-intentioned, but way out of their league person versus someone more knowledgeable, but compromised?

A lot of voters vote based on hair style, fashion, looks, and even race.  I wish there was some way we can stop this, but I feel there is no way without restricting voter's rights.

I would rather they just not vote. 

Another is union members just blindly voting whatever the union endorses.  The unions even provide "cheat sheets" to those members that can't or won't think for themselves.

Before I get bashed I was a union member that considered the union endorsements but always made the final decision when voting. 

Somehow, voters in America have to take the voting process more seriously.  Maybe it should be strongly taught in schools.  I remember it was once, don't know if it still is nowadays and won't be surprised it's not.

I got a few friends who are teachers and very upset about the pay cuts.  I told them, well your union endorsed Ige twice, so...

I don't understand why they are part of a union that does nothing for them? How much are union dues?

May be wrong, but you have to be an union member to get the teaching job, or at least hold it.

Got a glimpse of that after retiring  and toying with the idea of substitute teaching.. Would have been quickly purged, of course.

I don't understand why they are part of a union that does nothing for them? How much are union dues?

Well, the price of freedom has suffered major inflation, with the American experiment that has long since degenerated into an empire.

This is the 21st century; it is a preposterous proposition, to believe the requirements of a democratic republic should not be updated with the times.  In the realm of how a society elects its public officials, I can't believe there are some who would not want to clearly define and raise the requirements to hold office.  I do not see anything wrong with including an education and experience requirement.  Personally, I would institute a 21st century version, of the civil service exams, that ancient China required for all public officials and make sure all voters see candidates' scores.

Likewise, there should also be official voting requirements for LIVING CITIZENS as well.  I do not see any problem with taking a qualifying quiz, before exercising your right to vote, as a citizen.  Anyone can study before such a quiz and would probably benefit, with the knowledge gained, when they go to the polls.

This could lead to a class system where only certain people have the "right" to vote.  AKA royals.  Who decides whos educated to vote?  Who writes the quiz?  Those in power will clearly want to write and have it answered by those who would vote them back in power.

If we go purely by education than republicans would never win.  Democrats have more college educated people voting for them. 

As for politicians.  The people should be free to do anything legal, that's the whole point of freedom.  If certain people can pick and choose who runs for office that's one step closer to dictatorship.

Who decides whos qualified?

Keeping the whole process open to all avoids some corruption that closing it would cause.  Its part of the checks and balances of democracy.

special forces mixed in with Antifa.
special forces took Pelosi's laptop.  that's why she is pushing so hard to remove Trump. then can cover up whats on the laptop
not my conspiracy theory, but sounds good to me 

I have to ask how did you determine that Republicans are far less educated than Democrats?

As a personal opinion, which is held by many, the value of a college degree has been diminished in part by the increased number of degree holders in the US (much more competition for jobs) as well as the cost of education.  Student loans are a big topic now, mostly because as schools raise tuitions and fees, the gov't offers what appears to be "free money" until the student graduates.  Once saddled with $30K - $300K in debt, depending on the school and degree/s sought, the value of that degree in terms of earnings is almost impossible to overcome.  That results in fewer new car and home purchases by young professionals which greatly affects the economy.

Having an education is always a good thing, but it should never be the one factor in judging intelligence or wisdom.  Until 100% of the population is offered a free college education in useful areas of study (not interpretive dance or transgender studies), you should never use college degrees as the #1 factor for deciding on who should be in public office.

Once you start getting into Masters and PhD territory, you also should have real-world accomplishments and work experience to draw from.  Someone who spent their adult years as a "professional student" with no work outside of academia should be scrutinized more carefully. 

In my last post, I stated a quiz could be drafted, as a way to ensure the competency of citizens, who partakes in the voting process.  Such a quiz could be written by academics and made public for all to see and study.  You want to exercise your right to vote, educate yourself with all the relevant issues, first.

What happens to the freedom of the un-educated?  Do they deserve less rights than the educated?


Although I, by far, have probably been the person most dog-piled, on this forum, for my political-legal stances; I have to ask how did you determine that Republicans are far less educated than Democrats?

Flap elaborated more than I will on this but TLDR:  Democrats have a higher percentage of college graduates in their supporters than republicans.


Who's picking and choosing, who can run or not?  What I was suggesting is raising the credential bar, of those wanting to run for office.  Anyone can work to attain the established credentials put forth, to run for office.  This, in addition to term limits, by the way, to prevent career politicians and political dynasties.

True this may work, but I still worry it lessens freedom to make people jump through hoops to exercise their rights.  Much like 2a still exists if you make everyone take 50hr courses, but is it the same as if you dont have that requirement.

As for dictatorship, America is already led by the autocracy, of an oligarchic elite, who indirectly already predetermines the candidates, of both political parties.

Won't comment on this

The minimum qualifications set forth for every elected office, as demanded, by the people.


By-the-same-token, keeping the process totally wide open leaves the body politic, to the current governmental crisis, the US empire is facing.

special forces mixed in with Antifa.
special forces took Pelosi's laptop.  that's why she is pushing so hard to remove Trump. then can cover up whats on the laptop
not my conspiracy theory, but sounds good to me 

What happens to the freedom of the un-educated?  Do they deserve less rights than the educated?

True this may work, but I still worry it lessens freedom to make people jump through hoops to exercise their rights.  Much like 2a still exists if you make everyone take 50hr courses, but is it the same as if you dont have that requirement.

OMG:  "Flap elaborated more than I will on this but TLDR:  Democrats have a higher percentage of college graduates in their supporters than republicans."

That's NOT what I said.  I said 54% of College Grads identify as Democrats.  I did not say that 54% of Democrat supporters have College degrees.

#StatisticsAreHard

Never said that.  If you read what i wrote,  I just said out of 100% of college grads a higher percentage belong to the democratic party....

Aka if we take 100% of college grads,  with your statistics, 54 % are democratic and 46% are republican.

If we suddenly woke up tomorrow and only college graduates could vote the democrats would never lose.