Comment Re:Usability Glitch? (Score 1) 366
This isn't what he was referring to. This has nothing to do with your preference of who you like or don't. He was stating that if you are not able to name facts about a candidate (and simple and glaringly obvious ones -- like if Obama is a republican), then your vote should not be counted because it is determined that you don't know what you are doing.
Now I like the idea of doing that, but I also feel that it is a violation of a person's rights. You might vote for Obama just because you like the guy and know nothing about him. While an ill thought out move in the eyes of many, there is nothing illegal and nothing wrong about doing that. I don't feel that we should say I don't care that you like this person, you don't know anything about them and your voice doesn't matter. Therefore, I'm arguing in opposition to making people prove some sort of competency before voting, even though I wish people would be more competent.
Now I like the idea of doing that, but I also feel that it is a violation of a person's rights. You might vote for Obama just because you like the guy and know nothing about him. While an ill thought out move in the eyes of many, there is nothing illegal and nothing wrong about doing that. I don't feel that we should say I don't care that you like this person, you don't know anything about them and your voice doesn't matter. Therefore, I'm arguing in opposition to making people prove some sort of competency before voting, even though I wish people would be more competent.
