Black voter registration effort launched at ‘Black Panther’ screenings

[Peebo]

niceatheist1h
Theo520:
Apathy is a valid concern for the democratic process, it’s far to easy to influence their votes.

If you can get the apathetic voter off the couch at all. There’s a stubborn 35% of US voters who just won’t vote. A lot of them are minorities, but there are plenty of white non-voters in that group as well.

And the US isn’t alone. Many of the more stable democracies have seen voter turnouts drop, so it isn’t just an American problem. It’s a democracy problem

Australia has had compulsory voting for over a century…I believe the reason being that because of the previous poor voter turnout…now it’s up in the 90% plus…and they have one of the stablest democracies in the world

 

[niceatheist]

Australia has had compulsory voting for over a century…I believe the reason being that because of the previous poor voter turnout…now it’s up in the 90% plus…and they have one of the stablest democracies in the world

Providing your elected member wasn’t born in New Zealand!

I have yet to find the study again, but several years ago I read that mandatory voting in Australia tended to slightly favor the incumbent, so there may be some slight disadvantage.

I’m not sure in the US that mandatory voting laws would be able to pass constitutional muster, but that’s just my opinion. And I think convincing people to do the right thing is probably better than pointing a metaphorical gun to their heads.

 

[Arkansan]

I think the bishops did it nicely. No need for me to improve on that.

You posted a link to a list of suggested activities. At no point did the author of that webpage make any argument whatsoever.

Arkansan:

You also have failed to make any argument for why this set up is a good thing.

How about: voting is a civic duty, and anything that can help eligible citizens register so that they can participate in elections is a good thing. Period.

Aiding the common good via the means available to oneself is a civic duty. There’s no reason to encourage people to vote if there is no reason to expect them to actually aid the common good with their votes.

So why is it you don’t like the idea of traditionally underrepresented groups in elections being encouraged to vote? What is it precisely you’re afraid they’ll do?

Vote irresponsibly. I’ve said that repeatedly.

 

[niceatheist]

niceatheist:

So why is it you don’t like the idea of traditionally underrepresented groups in elections being encouraged to vote? What is it precisely you’re afraid they’ll do?

Vote irresponsibly. I’ve said that repeatedly.

As defined by whom exactly? Who gets to decide what constitutes “irresponsible voting”? After all, there are several million Democratic voters who think a whole bunch of American voters voted very irresponsibly last November.

This is the problem. You don’t have a metric, or if you do, you don’t want to say it out loud. So what, in your view, constitutes an irresponsible vote? Is it voting for the guy because you like his hair, or voting for him because his name rhymes with your favorite color, or voting for him because he has a telegenic smile, or voting for him because “my dad voted for that party, and my grandfather and great-grandfather before him!”

Or is it more of the kind of irresponsibility as in “they’re going to vote for a liberal or a minority candidate”? Let’s get to the fine point here. What constitutes an irresponsible vote?

 

[JulianN]

Define “voting irresponsibly.”

 

[dixieagle]

Vote irresponsibly. I’ve said that repeatedly.

So, I gather that you define “voting irresponsibly” as voting differently from you? If not, please enlighten us.

 

[Arkansan]

As defined by whom exactly?

One doesn’t need to have an answer to every controversial medical question (or any) to be able to say that only those who know something of medicine should practice it. Likewise, which one of us is right about voting does not affect the point.

Define “voting irresponsibly.”

Arkansan:

Vote irresponsibly. I’ve said that repeatedly.

So, I gather that you define “voting irresponsibly” as voting differently from you? If not, please enlighten us.

Objectively, an irresponsible vote is one that is harmful to the common good. Subjectively, it is one that is not informed by a diligent effort to determine which candidate is the best. Obviously, people who don’t care enough to register on their own are much more likely to vote in a subjectively irresponsible manner.

 

[niceatheist]

niceatheist:

As defined by whom exactly?

One doesn’t need to have an answer to every controversial medical question (or any) to be able to say that only those who know something of medicine should practice it. Likewise, which one of us is right about voting does not affect the point.

Becoming a doctor is not a constitutionally-guaranteed right. Voting is. Your analogy is bad.

Define “voting irresponsibly.”

Arkansan:

Vote irresponsibly. I’ve said that repeatedly.

So, I gather that you define “voting irresponsibly” as voting differently from you? If not, please enlighten us.

Objectively, an irresponsible vote is one that is harmful to the common good.

As defined by who exactly? Who gets to decide what the common good is?

Subjectively, it is one that is not informed by a diligent effort to determine which candidate is the best. Obviously, people who don’t care enough to register on their own are much more likely to vote in a subjectively irresponsible manner.

Plenty of registered voters aren’t diligent. That isn’t a qualification for voting. And whose to say who is or isn’t diligent? Do you have a window upon men’s souls to know which ones thought really hard before marking their ballot?

I think your circling around your real answer, but you hint at it with the so very tired “common good” argument.

 

[JulianN]

Not necessarily. People may believe their vote will not matter, or have had difficulty getting to a voter registration office.

I think we’ve all seen the damage an ignorant electorate voting against the common good can do —but I don’t think that is the result of encouraging minority voters.

 

[Peebo]

I’m not sure if there is a defined definition of voting irresponsibly…people may have many different reasons for voting…someone who is charismatic…someone who looks good…because it’s a family tradition to vote for a certain party…because of the policies…many people will have different ideals they will look for…in the 2008 election many black voters came out because one of the candidates was black…and many whites because they just wanted change…so I wouldn’t call any of it irresponsible…rather each person is making a responsible choice as they see it.

 

[anikins]

That’s fantastic. Everyone should be registered to vote. Registration booths at theaters is a great idea.

 

[Arkansan]

Becoming a doctor is not a constitutionally-guaranteed right. Voting is. Your analogy is bad.

You have failed to make any argument for why this set up is a good thing.

As defined by who exactly? Who gets to decide what the common good is?

One does not need to be able to explain every aspect (or any) of the common good, to say that such a thing exists and should be the guiding principle of political action.

Plenty of registered voters aren’t diligent. That isn’t a qualification for voting. And whose to say who is or isn’t diligent? Do you have a window upon men’s souls to know which ones thought really hard before marking their ballot?

I have common sense, which tells us that those who put more effort into something will, well, put more effort into it.

I think your circling around your real answer, but you hint at it with the so very tired “common good” argument.

This is an ad hominem. I’ve intentionally avoided the discussion of policy specifics because it is not relevant to the argument.

Not necessarily. People may believe their vote will not matter, or have had difficulty getting to a voter registration office.

People who think their vote won’t matter are also less likely to exercise diligence in casting it.

I don’t believe that any real difficulty exists in registering to vote in America, but even if it did, that would be good. Requiring effort to register would also select for responsible voters.

 

[niceatheist]

I’m not sure if there is a defined definition of voting irresponsibly…people may have many different reasons for voting…someone who is charismatic…someone who looks good…because it’s a family tradition to vote for a certain party…because of the policies…many people will have different ideals they will look for…in the 2008 election many black voters came out because one of the candidates was black…and many whites because they just wanted change…so I wouldn’t call any of it irresponsible…rather each person is making a responsible choice as they see it.

Precisely. The whole notion of “responsible” versus “irresponsible” is far too subjective.

As to the “common good” argument, well that’s even worse, in my view. The “common good” argument is so easy to abuse, as is demonstrated by the Jim Crow-era laws that limited voter participation by African Americans, always justified based on the “common good”, as in “those colored folks will vote irresponsibly, so for the common good they need to be discouraged”.

In the name of the “common good” has been the means by which a great many injustices have been committed over the millennia.

 

[JulianN]

Again, define “responsible.”

 

[niceatheist]

niceatheist:

Becoming a doctor is not a constitutionally-guaranteed right. Voting is. Your analogy is bad.

You have failed to make any argument for why this set up is a good thing.

And I’ll repeat that I don’t have to. No voter owes you an explanation… ever.

As defined by who exactly? Who gets to decide what the common good is?

One does not need to be able to explain every aspect (or any) of the common good, to say that such a thing exists and should be the guiding principle of political action.

Plenty of registered voters aren’t diligent. That isn’t a qualification for voting. And whose to say who is or isn’t diligent? Do you have a window upon men’s souls to know which ones thought really hard before marking their ballot?

I have common sense, which tells us that those who put more effort into something will, well, put more effort into it.

“Common sense” is just another word for personal prejudice. It’s as an abused a concept as the “common good”.

I think your circling around your real answer, but you hint at it with the so very tired “common good” argument.

This is an ad hominem. I’ve intentionally avoided the discussion of policy specifics because it is not relevant to the argument.

No, this is not an ad hominem. Your lack of clarity certainly raises questions.

But suffice it to say, minorities don’t have to justify their reasons for voting to you, and those encouraging them to vote don’t have to either. It is a constitutionally-guaranteed right, a civil liberty both to vote and to encourage others to vote, and no one ever has to justify that to anyone.

 

[Arkansan]

In the name of the “common good” has been the means by which a great many injustices have been committed over the millennia.

Then what standard do you propose for making political decisions?

Again, define “responsible.”

“exercised with diiligence”

 

[JulianN]

There is no test for voting, no hoop through which to jump. It is a right guaranteed to all citizens. You have failed to present any argument as to why a voter registration drive is a bad thing.

 

[niceatheist]

niceatheist:

In the name of the “common good” has been the means by which a great many injustices have been committed over the millennia.

Then what standard do you propose for making political decisions?

I don’t propose a standard at all, any more than I propose a standard for those wishing to worship at the church of their choosing, or the free and peaceful exercise of any civil liberty. It’s none of my business how someone votes, unless they choose to tell me. I am free to make my case for who they should vote for, that’s acceptable, even laudable democratic expression, but the act of suppressing, even through inaction in encouraging the vote, those who you think might not be “responsible” or might not live up to your “standard”, well that’s just plain anti-democratic.

Again, define “responsible.”

“exercised with diiligence”

And how do you know those that got registered to vote at the Black Panther screenings won’t be diligent in their vote? Again, do you have some window on their souls, some way of peering into their minds to tell if they’re diligent or not? And really, why would you even care? There are plenty of voters who vote for reasons many would consider silly, flippant or ignorant, and do so every election. Why is it worse for a newly registered voter in the lineup to watch Black Panther any less worthy of the right to vote than some guy who votes the way he does because his family has done so for generations?

 

[Arkansan]

It’s a bad thing because it encourages voting by people who don’t care enough to make an informed choice.

Why should everyone be able to vote?

 

[niceatheist]

It’s a bad thing because it encourages voting by people who don’t care enough to make an informed choice.

You have no idea whether that is true or not.

Why should everyone be able to vote?

Because the constitutions of virtually every modern democratic industrialized country guarantees that and a number of other political freedoms. In other words, in the West, we decided about a century ago (give or take) that all law-abiding adults had the right to vote. In some countries, like Australia, it’s even mandatory.

Who are you to say that everyone shouldn’t vote?