![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Dun vote kuz u r 2 stoopid
Nov. 4th, 2006 05:19 pmI just went to dontvote.org and took their test. Quoting the site, : DontVote.org's mission is to combat the "Get out the Vote" movement that is pushed by organizations that would like to increase the number of uneducated voters to help their cause. DontVote.org encourages people to Vote, but only AFTER they have educated themselves on the policies and individuals for which they are voting. Voting should be considered a privilege and exercised with responsibility and discretion. Just like a final exam, responsible voting requires self-education and thought. When the time comes to cast your ballot, if you don't know for what or whom you're voting, then DON'T VOTE.
It seems a simple concept. Don't vote unless you know what you're voting for or against. So I took the test. I did well, I got an A - scoring 98.some odd percent. But I was really concerned about the test. In fact, it made me downright angry.
The test is a series of pictures of people with multiple choice radio buttons to identify them and their titles or occupations. What angered me at first was that the few I missed had nothing to do with politics. Why should being able to correctly identify Christina Aguilera or Paris Hilton have anything to do with voting?
Then I thought about the ones I got right. I was able to pick out such diverse persons as Kofi Anan, Mukhtar Al Sadr, and Tony Blair and identify them. Why should they really matter? They aren't running in any US election that I know of. Why give points for identifying foreign leaders when you're voting for your local senate candidate? Isn't it more important that you be able to identify him or her?
Then I though about the others. Nancy Pelosi, Tony Snow, Dennis Hastert... Yes, it's really nice that people know who they are, but unless you are in their district, should it really exclude you from voting?
I'm all for an informed electorate. If the folks at dontvote.org really want an informed electorate, they should be informing voters, not dissuading them with irrelevant tests. They guy next door might not be able to pick Bill Frist out of a line up, but he can probably decide whether or not to support the school levy.
So Don't take tests. Vote.
ETA This is a sham site - the real site is www.dontvote.comIt's full of real information about candidates and measures.
It seems a simple concept. Don't vote unless you know what you're voting for or against. So I took the test. I did well, I got an A - scoring 98.some odd percent. But I was really concerned about the test. In fact, it made me downright angry.
The test is a series of pictures of people with multiple choice radio buttons to identify them and their titles or occupations. What angered me at first was that the few I missed had nothing to do with politics. Why should being able to correctly identify Christina Aguilera or Paris Hilton have anything to do with voting?
Then I thought about the ones I got right. I was able to pick out such diverse persons as Kofi Anan, Mukhtar Al Sadr, and Tony Blair and identify them. Why should they really matter? They aren't running in any US election that I know of. Why give points for identifying foreign leaders when you're voting for your local senate candidate? Isn't it more important that you be able to identify him or her?
Then I though about the others. Nancy Pelosi, Tony Snow, Dennis Hastert... Yes, it's really nice that people know who they are, but unless you are in their district, should it really exclude you from voting?
I'm all for an informed electorate. If the folks at dontvote.org really want an informed electorate, they should be informing voters, not dissuading them with irrelevant tests. They guy next door might not be able to pick Bill Frist out of a line up, but he can probably decide whether or not to support the school levy.
So Don't take tests. Vote.
ETA This is a sham site - the real site is www.dontvote.comIt's full of real information about candidates and measures.
