I was thinking of Trump asking Congress to change an amendment that he didn't like.

But I can easily see it as a cause-and-effect kind of thing. As in, Trump would not have been elected if Obama hadn't made such a mess first. So if Obama doesn't get elected because he says there's 57 states, Trump and changing a constitutional amendment doesn't even come up.

@Knixon said:

@Nubyan said:

@cswood: 👊👍👏👊👍👏👊👍👏👊👍👏👊👍👏

Thank you for that well stated rebuttal.

Why in the hell would a society want to make voting more difficult?

Again, thank you.

Seems like this episode answers that question too. People don't value or take seriously things that are too easy.

I think that highly depends on the thing. A lot of people don't have easy access to things like education so they go about their lives without it and thus don't value it. If those same people had easy access to free education there'd be an increased chance they would take advantage of that access and thus would value it.

I think voting is something more people would engage in if there weren't a bunch of hurdles intentionally put in their way preventing them from voting.

Okay, but how about we get people educated FIRST, and THEN make voting a lot easier?

But I'm not actually real optimistic about the education part. I think a lot of people wouldn't bother even if it was more free and easy than it is now. So by taking the sensible path, I would predict nothing much changes. People won't get more educated - not because they can't, but because they don't want to - so therefore no reason to make voting easier.

My father surrendered his driving license at age 85 because he thought his reflexes were getting slow. A month later the legislature passed a law requiring a drivers license to vote, which meant my father was tricked into giving up his voting rights. Fortunately the court system threw out the law, for that very reason. ( And by the way, my father had a doctor's degree. He didn't need to be coerced into getting more education).

Well rather than argue that people over 85 maybe lose their voting reflexes too, I might suggest that the real issue is photo ID, and I suspect he could have a state-issued photo ID without it being a driver's license. "You have to have a driver's license to vote!" sounds like lefty alarmism. The same kind of thing that claims other poor minorities etc get disenfranchised by ID requirements even though those people must have photo ID to do so many other things in their life. So to claim that they suddenly don't have ID when it comes time to vote, is just dumb. What it sounds like to me is that requiring ID means it becomes harder for people to vote twice or more, and for dead people to vote from the graveyard, etc. So I'm not surprised that Democrat politicians and activists oppose it.

. "You have to have a driver's license to vote!" sounds like lefty alarmism. "

It wasn't lefty alarmism -- the stupid legislature actually tried to do it. The courts overturned it and now we have a photo ID system, but we're still stuck with the same stupid legislature.

That may be, although it would be interesting to know where that happened to look it up. But even aside from that issue of "driver's license" versus "photo ID," the fact is that the left opposes any kind of ID requirement for voting. No matter how high-sounding a reason they might cook up, the only REAL reason that makes sense is to make vote fraud easier.

It's probably on youtube, some time ago a reporter from some newspaper or TV station or something, went around some black neighborhoods - inner city and otherwise - asking people if they had photo ID or knew where to get one. Because some people - mostly democrat politicians - were claiming they didn't have them and didn't know how to get one, so they couldn't vote. The responses were basically "what dumb cracker said that?"

@ScorpionQ2 said:

@Nubyan said:

Although, I once had someone say to me..."I thought the presidential election was going to be on a Thursday this year". Yup...true story. I just shook my head.

Sad

-but yet so hilarious

I forgot to mention this. Even more sad. The true story comment above came from someone who is college educated...a registered nurse no doubt. So it goes to show, that in many cases...higher educated people are equally as stupid as the less educated.

@Knixon said:

Okay, but how about we get people educated FIRST, and THEN make voting a lot easier?

But I'm not actually real optimistic about the education part. I think a lot of people wouldn't bother even if it was more free and easy than it is now.

Really? Why do you think so many people are willing to take on student loan debt? Because a better education typically leads to better job opportunity and better wages. The big problem is that debt means those people can't contribute to the economy and that debt limits their options. I work with someone who makes more money than me, but she owes thousands of dollars in student loan debt so she can't even afford to buy a decent car or put a down payment on a house.

If even dirt poor people could attend collage for free, even community college, that could give them a ladder to climb out of poverty, you telling the majority of people wouldn't take advantage of that? Hell, I have a full time job and if I could go back to school for free to get a better degree I'd consider going even if it were night school or on the weekends.

@cswood said:

@Knixon said:

Okay, but how about we get people educated FIRST, and THEN make voting a lot easier?

But I'm not actually real optimistic about the education part. I think a lot of people wouldn't bother even if it was more free and easy than it is now.

Really? Why do you think so many people are willing to take on student loan debt? Because a better education typically leads to better job opportunity and better wages. The big problem is that debt means those people can't contribute to the economy and that debt limits their options. I work with someone who makes more money than me, but she owes thousands of dollars in student loan debt so she can't even afford to buy a decent car or put a down payment on a house.

If even dirt poor people could attend collage for free, even community college, that could give them a ladder to climb out of poverty, you telling the majority of people wouldn't take advantage of that? Hell, I have a full time job and if I could go back to school for free to get a better degree I'd consider going even if it were night school or on the weekends.

Count me in.

The number one reason why high school graduates or anyone for that fact don't attend college is because they simply can't afford it. There are thousands of students that end up dropping out of college due to the cost.

I thought everyone knew that.

You shouldn't overestimate the value of "education." As said earlier, college-educated people aren't necessarily that much smarter really. You can teach someone how to be a registered nurse, for example, and all they learn is medical-type stuff, and not even very much of that. Or at least not in really good ways.

"The number one reason why high school graduates or anyone for that fact don't attend college is because they simply can't afford it. There are thousands of students that end up dropping out of college due to the cost."

Many countries subsidize college tuition because they think a highly educated citizens will make their country more prosperous. Why doesn't the US? )

@CharlesTheBold said:

"The number one reason why high school graduates or anyone for that fact don't attend college is because they simply can't afford it. There are thousands of students that end up dropping out of college due to the cost."

Many countries subsidize college tuition because they think a highly educated citizens will make their country more prosperous. Why doesn't the US? )

I wish I had the answer. It seems like a no brainer to me. Much like subsidized healthcare for a healthier population of people. The cost for these benefits would actually be lower than the overall cost of not providing the subsidies.

Better educated and healthier benefits a society versus the opposite. In my opinion.

@Knixon said:

You shouldn't overestimate the value of "education." As said earlier, college-educated people aren't necessarily that much smarter really. You can teach someone how to be a registered nurse, for example, and all they learn is medical-type stuff, and not even very much of that. Or at least not in really good ways.

That's not a very good argument. Having a college education shows that you put in the time and effort to learn things you didn't learn in high school. If I need an operation I'd rather it be done by someone who actually studied in that field.

If someone is going to build things like buildings, cars or airplanes don't you want someone who was educated in those fields to be in charge of those things?

Can I assume you did not attend college? If you didn't what was your reason? And if you did then what did you study for? I went to college but couldn't afford to take the courses I wanted to. I like to learn. If I could go for free I'd know more than I know now.

How can anyone be against learning?