Bring back the poll test?

Republicans and Democrats frequently assert that their opponents are uninformed or idiotic. I see merit in both assertions.

Any suggestions for a way to screen voters for awareness of the issues, history, science, logic, current events, ethics, economics or whatever? Or is this just a bad idea and I'm a terrible person for even bringing it up?

There is no fair way to limit the franchise. Better to just reconcile yourself to the obvious truth that democracy sucks, but everything else is worse.

Idealizing "freedom" and "democracy" does nothing but cause trouble, anyway.

abolish the two-party dominated system! give more control to the populace! ride flying unicorns through the magical lollipop fields!

VOTE RON PAUL '08!

I've got your Pole Test . . .

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

any idea when his campaign trail crosses through never never land?

no

You'd have to have some sort of exam. Administered from outside the USA, clearly, since that would be the first step to avoiding political bias...

Because people outside the US would not posibly be biased one way or another towards how our political process happened.

You increase emphasis on education--raise the bar and such.

I think you mean "when it leaves never never land."

I wonder what percent of people would be knocked out by a test with just one question.

"Who is the current president of the United States of America?"

Or to make it extra tricky, they could ask for the vice-president.

It's a scary thought to contemplate the number of people that would cut out.

Bush stole the election! The real president is Howard Dean!

(etc.)

Yeah, poll tests have never failed us before!

Pon Raul 2008 and stuff...

Have a science test for republicans, and an economics test for democrats. And a schizophrenia exam for libertarians

Wasn't it Gore Vidal who once said "Only 50% of the nation reads newspapers, and only 50% of the nation votes. One hopes they're the same 50%"

But seriously, the poll test is the exact sort of elitism that needs to be avoided.

Why should it be avoided? If you can't identify prominent political figures and issues, should you really be choosing the next president?

Listen: I don't follow football, so, if the choice for the next head coach of the NY Giants was put to a national vote, I would abstain.

I wonder how many people voted last election because P. Diddy told them to.

Any system for restricting the franchise to "qualified" voters would cause just as many problems as it avoids (technocracy doesn't work any better than democracy, really), with the additional drawback of being an immoral restriction of basic civil rights. Rights belong to people because they're human or because they're citizens, not because (by someone's inevitably arguable definition) they're smart or well-informed.

Now who can tell me why literacy tests and poll taxes were eliminated? Anyone? Anyone? Dis-en-what-ment? Disenfranchisement of who? Of African-Americans? Stemming from the Jim What laws? Jim Crow?

If that's your idea of a good analogy, perhaps you shouldn't be allowed to vote. Glass houses and all.

Heathen_Dave does not care about black people.

I think we should have poll surveys, instead, where you have to tell everyone who yr current crush is and yr a/s/l.

lol

Pfft. Clearly those negroes are like children, and can't be trusted to make their own decisions - smart ones anyway.