General Discussion

Mairead

(9,557 posts)

149. No, it shouldn't be anonymous

Mon May 28, 2012, 03:48 AM

May 2012

And there's no reason it needs to be.

Assign every voter a randomly-generated "mask" for that election.

Put that masked identity on the ballot.

Provide the voter a receipt so that the voter can prove that they are the one behind the mask.

Then, if the vote totals come out funny, everyone can look up her/his vote and confirm or disconfirm it. If that weren't sufficient to allay suspicion, everyone could come forward and a full recount made, which would completely expose the source of any chicanery.

Public counting is the next-best idea, but any time ballots are completely anonymous, they can be replaced by fraudulent ones before the count.

Those who want to subvert democracy use all means in their power, so those of us who want democracy need to stop up all the ratholes.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

191 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Do you support intelligence tests designed to keep some citizens away from the ballot box? [View all] cynatnite May 2012 OP

All Citizens deserve to be represented annabanana May 2012 #1

My parrots agree. L0oniX May 2012 #23

They're only in it for the crackers pinboy3niner May 2012 #30

Including children? nt ZombieHorde May 2012 #29

Tests were used to stop blacks from voting. CreekDog May 2012 #58

Planned Parenthood has extremely racist roots, but it is much better now. ZombieHorde May 2012 #64

Can you decide who is intelligent enough to vote? There is no way you, or I are fit to do that. CreekDog May 2012 #65

I would have the tests be designed by esteemed psychologists and sociologists. ZombieHorde May 2012 #69

will the disenfranchised by wards of the state then? free of taxes and provided care? CreekDog May 2012 #72

"will you then allow them to be free of its obligations?" ZombieHorde May 2012 #81

Many, many experts believe that there is no way to truly judge intelligence in a scientific way cali May 2012 #90

I actually started to developed this point of view while working with that community. ZombieHorde May 2012 #92

well it's a shockingly shortsighted, ill thought out pov cali May 2012 #94

You still have not answered my question about children voting. nt ZombieHorde May 2012 #95

yeah, I did. cali May 2012 #101

Children can't vote because children can't vote. ZombieHorde May 2012 #107

not what I said, but oh well. cali May 2012 #116

this will come as a shock to you, I'm sure cali May 2012 #73

Yes, this is why I would have more than one person to design the test. nt ZombieHorde May 2012 #76

You do know that once you open that door these UnrepentantLiberal May 2012 #91

I agree Republicans would try to use this to their advantage. ZombieHorde May 2012 #93

"The implication of the plan would have to be careful." UnrepentantLiberal May 2012 #96

I completely agree we cannot make people vote intelligently, ZombieHorde May 2012 #97

With this congress? UnrepentantLiberal May 2012 #99

OK, you got me there. nt ZombieHorde May 2012 #105

don't spread disgusting right wing lying dog shit. cali May 2012 #70

She wrote about her views in her book. ZombieHorde May 2012 #75

you aren't providing any evidence. Here's some for you: cali May 2012 #79

OK, we both agree she was a racist, just not an extreme racist. Here is another bit from the link... ZombieHorde May 2012 #82

bzzzt. Here's your FALSE claim: . Planned Parenthood has extremely racist roots cali May 2012 #86

Racism Beyond Color Hermes Daughter May 2012 #132

I started a thread on this to see how posters in the AA group feel about her. ZombieHorde May 2012 #189

I voted no. On the other hand I think you did to present exboyfil May 2012 #2

Optical scan ballots do, by definition, represent a physical record of each vote frazzled May 2012 #7

But currently they are anonymous records Mairead May 2012 #32

Voting must be anonymous frazzled May 2012 #42

No, it shouldn't be anonymous Mairead May 2012 #149

What is wrong with a hand written, hand counted paper ballot? Egalitarian Thug May 2012 #103

I can go with hand counted ballots as well exboyfil May 2012 #140

I support nothing designed to keep citizens from the ballot box etherealtruth May 2012 #3

Should the voting age be lowered to zero? nt ZombieHorde May 2012 #35

Yes etherealtruth May 2012 #45

Why shouldn't children be allowed to vote? ZombieHorde May 2012 #48

Children lack maturity, experience and knowledge etherealtruth May 2012 #57

Perhaps we should have a test based on maturity, experience, and knowledge? ZombieHorde May 2012 #85

If your goal is to create a society where only the "elite" ... etherealtruth May 2012 #88

do people realize that you're advocating for people to be tested for mental illness? CreekDog May 2012 #78

Additionally, it almost sounds as if s/he is advocating etherealtruth May 2012 #83

Psychologists do more than determine mental illness. ZombieHorde May 2012 #84

yes, and what would a psychologist offer in terms of evaluating one's suitability for voting? CreekDog May 2012 #108

They would help design an intelligence test, with the help of sociologists. ZombieHorde May 2012 #109

an IQ test for voting? what on earth would be the threshold? CreekDog May 2012 #112

Yes, that is what I have been arguing for this whole time. ZombieHorde May 2012 #113

holy shit CreekDog May 2012 #119

In my opinion, the results would include less war, better social safety nets, ZombieHorde May 2012 #122

Yeah but that's not borne out by studies or evidence CreekDog May 2012 #126

not to mention profoundly anti-democratic (note lower-case 'd'). - n/t coalition_unwilling May 2012 #141

Why a round number? JonLP24 May 2012 #172

If 111.23 made you feel better, then I would probably be willing to bend. nt ZombieHorde May 2012 #181

I think only people in blue states should be allowed to vote cali May 2012 #118

That would probably result in less wars, better social safety nets, ZombieHorde May 2012 #120

because it is a crazy, ugly idea. cali May 2012 #121

I don't believe in justice. I don't think it exists. nt ZombieHorde May 2012 #123

it may not exist but think of it as a Platonic Ideal cali May 2012 #127

I completely agree that the abstract concept of justice can motivate people to act. ZombieHorde May 2012 #183

Then why are you here, a DU member? Puzzledtraveller May 2012 #177

I post on DU because I am a liberal and I love liberals. ZombieHorde May 2012 #184

No responsible psychologist or sociologist would agree to that LeftishBrit May 2012 #142

Since you're a credentialed person, I wonder why you're focussing on IQ tests Mairead May 2012 #155

really? and the hell do YOU know that? cali May 2012 #159

Yes, really. Mairead May 2012 #163

so don't take my advice, dear. take the the advice cali May 2012 #174

'certainly usable ways to test for the ability to vote intelligently' LeftishBrit May 2012 #168

You're conflating two things Mairead May 2012 #171

what absolute bullshit. cali May 2012 #175

Cali, it's because you laugh at what you don't understand Mairead May 2012 #176

do tell, what don't I (and just about everyone else on this thread) cali May 2012 #179

I go back and forth on this Prophet 451 May 2012 #4

Can a dictatorship be benevolent without the right to have oneself represented? cynatnite May 2012 #5

Good question Prophet 451 May 2012 #6

"Benevolent dictatorship" was Plato's idea Mairead May 2012 #18

"there's no shortage of people who think they or their kind are best qualified to rule" discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2012 #31

Leo Strauss Hermes Daughter May 2012 #133

What would make a really fascinating doctoral dissertation Mairead May 2012 #169

No such thing as a "Benevolent Dictator" FrodosPet May 2012 #130

I'm all for it, as long as I get to be the benevolent despot - n/t coalition_unwilling May 2012 #143

Hell no. Hatchling May 2012 #8

*Anyone* using those tests would game them to exclude their opponents Posteritatis May 2012 #14

They will most likely try, but their efforts can be foiled. ZombieHorde May 2012 #54

It's not constitutional. cali May 2012 #62

... cthulu2016 May 2012 #9

Done. cynatnite May 2012 #24

Not quite. You missed three. nt Electric Monk May 2012 #111

Of course not. n/t DLevine May 2012 #10

Well, I'd rather have intelligent tests than stupid tests, for sure. MineralMan May 2012 #11

I voted don't know Politicalboi May 2012 #12

No one who advocates for stuff like that ever thinks they'd be affected by it Posteritatis May 2012 #13

Nope lunatica May 2012 #15

I do think there should be a test and, yes, it should be an intelligent one Mairead May 2012 #16

You say "People who recieved a crappy education... have neither the background or the time" cherokeeprogressive May 2012 #26

Do you think working-class people receive a *good* education??? Mairead May 2012 #27

Weeding out adults who were "working-class kids in an inner-city school" sounds racist in the cherokeeprogressive May 2012 #68

If it really "sounds racist", that's a problem inside you Mairead May 2012 #145

so since we're not a democracy & the rich game the system, let them game it more by excluding HiPointDem May 2012 #137

You're assuming stuff not in evidence Mairead May 2012 #152

your proposal wouldn't prevent people from voting against their interests (as perceived by you), HiPointDem May 2012 #153

Not so. Mairead May 2012 #154

Here's what you wrote. I read it & I stand by my statement. HiPointDem May 2012 #157

No... That Would Be Totally Unfair To Republicans... WillyT May 2012 #17

Per your second paragraph, this is ABSOLUTELY about engineering election results. cherokeeprogressive May 2012 #19

Intelligence tests. Not intelligent tests. LeftyMom May 2012 #20

Me, too. I fixed it. n/t cynatnite May 2012 #25

No need to be mean here. nt ZombieHorde May 2012 #37

Absolutely not proud2BlibKansan May 2012 #21

Intelligence tests would eliminate most repukes. L0oniX May 2012 #22

no. they would not. nt La Lioness Priyanka May 2012 #77

Definitely not! LeftishBrit May 2012 #28

Yes, of course. ZombieHorde May 2012 #33

your're kidding, right? cali May 2012 #36

Do think small children should be allowed to vote? ZombieHorde May 2012 #39

no. although I'm not against lowering the age to 16 cali May 2012 #40

Yes, but why should they not be allowed to vote? ZombieHorde May 2012 #44

because they are minors. Some children (probably quite a few) cali May 2012 #47

You are describing children, but you are not saying why they should not be allowed to vote. ZombieHorde May 2012 #52

oh for pity's sake. Children are under parental control cali May 2012 #53

They're not allowed to vote because they're not allowed to vote. ZombieHorde May 2012 #61

No. I'm telling you that under the constitution children are not granted cali May 2012 #63

Yes, we all know that. But why did people restrict voting by age in the Constitution? ZombieHorde May 2012 #67

3 more questions: CreekDog May 2012 #135

IQ tests and intelligence tests aren't the same thing Mairead May 2012 #156

keep in mind whom I was asking the questions of: CreekDog May 2012 #162

Yes. Mairead May 2012 #164

I am not sure why my personal information is important to this debate. ZombieHorde May 2012 #180

when you suggest a test which would preserve your voting rights and take away others'... CreekDog May 2012 #185

I probably shouldn't admit this, since it will probably be a debate stopper, ZombieHorde May 2012 #187

Thanks for considering what I said CreekDog May 2012 #188

Let's be perfectly clear here: you are essentially renouncing the principle of coalition_unwilling May 2012 #144

We don't have one man, one vote now. ZombieHorde May 2012 #151

That is why I asked whether you were renouncing the 'principle' of 'one man, coalition_unwilling May 2012 #173

Universal suffrage is an interesting idea, but I have never experienced it. ZombieHorde May 2012 #182

Um, small point, but 'universal manhood suffrage,' i.e., not children. - n/t coalition_unwilling May 2012 #186

fuck no. only a freeper or someone too stupid to understand cali May 2012 #34

LOL....then quit whining about voters electing the wrong person! Logical May 2012 #60

uh, first of all I don't whine about it. cali May 2012 #66

Who writes the questions on the test? johnd83 May 2012 #38

no kidding. there are threads like this regularly over in freeperville cali May 2012 #41

Whoever has the power loyalsister May 2012 #55

I would have a team of esteemed psychologists and sociologists write the questions. nt ZombieHorde May 2012 #115

This is a good example of how dangerous it can be to believe your own propaganda RZM May 2012 #43

amen. I am disgusted and shocked that anyone here believes this to be a good thing. cali May 2012 #49

and who will WRITE the test? will it be someone trustworthy? 0rganism May 2012 #46

and who will administer it and "grade" it? cali May 2012 #50

Is this the first question? retread May 2012 #51

That is actually pretty funny. nt ZombieHorde May 2012 #114

Lteracy tests were historically racists GarroHorus May 2012 #56

Of course not and that other thread was a joke. n/t Egalitarian Thug May 2012 #59

That is one of the most offensive ideas I have ever seen on this site. n/t 99Forever May 2012 #71

Indeed. And some of the comments are as ugly as any I've seen here. cali May 2012 #80

+1,000,000,000 x 1,000,000,000 - n/t coalition_unwilling May 2012 #146

No. there is a mean sub-group difference of one standard deviation on intelligence test La Lioness Priyanka May 2012 #74

just think about how that could be used against someone YOU support ibegurpard May 2012 #87

There is a more fundemental question johnd83 May 2012 #89

Neither intelligence nor education necessarily makes a good voter IphengeniaBlumgarten May 2012 #98

What is the definition of "undesirable"? former9thward May 2012 #100

Somebody who votes the opposite the way you would like them to vote. Kaleva May 2012 #102

Then I'm all for it!! former9thward May 2012 #106

Only if it is a single question grantcart May 2012 #104

I find it sickening that even three people would vote yes for such a twisted idea. marmar May 2012 #110

there are indeed some sicko posts in this thread. It's pretty horrifying. cali May 2012 #117

A person who is legally competent has the right to vote: struggle4progress May 2012 #124

nope. After all, people with Down Syndrome can vote cali May 2012 #129

Thanks! I just looked at some NC law, and you are right, at least in regard struggle4progress May 2012 #131

No. But, I'd like candidates to be attached to lie-detectors when giving speeches. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2012 #125

Lie detectors with high-voltage-dispensing wands when lies are detected. (Nothing coalition_unwilling May 2012 #147

And if they pass the lie detector test FrodosPet May 2012 #166

Let's disenfranchise EVEN MORE Democratic voters FrodosPet May 2012 #128

Well said! Hermes Daughter May 2012 #134

Lots of democrats apparently want only "smart" dems to vote. No wonder the party's in trouble. HiPointDem May 2012 #138

Your brother would pass any test *I*'d write Mairead May 2012 #165

any such test is designed to keep citizens from voting. that's the only purpose. and as such, HiPointDem May 2012 #136

Bravo! Well put! - n/t coalition_unwilling May 2012 #148

I don't support any measure that's intended to prevent any otherwise-eligible citizen from voting. WillowTree May 2012 #139

how do you do it? Why is it necessary? cali May 2012 #150

Yes - Because the uninformed are wrecking this country and impacting the rest of the world dinopipie May 2012 #158

wow. yet another cali May 2012 #160

BFD a typo, I would call you a tool for such a post but that would be against the rules dinopipie May 2012 #161

ooh. aren't you clever. cali May 2012 #167

the uninformed are? gee, i thought it was the ruling class. HiPointDem May 2012 #178

Of course not. Iggo May 2012 #170

Perhaps a good idea, but unimplementable with real humans WriteWrong May 2012 #190

do you always know the name of everyone running for every office? cali May 2012 #191