Why would I think that? Because it puts people in a compromising situation. The requirements for voting are there to weed out ignorance, disloyalty, and other conflicts of interest. That's why Russians can't vote in our elections. That's why children can't vote...and so on. It is a matter of national interests. Why are you playing dumb about these self evident matters?
I don't find it at all self-evident that people on welfare are in a compromising situation, nor do I think that requirements for voting are there to "weed out" anything. We don't allow Russians and children to vote here because they're not citizens and thus don't have a full stake in the country, but that doesn't mean they would necessarily vote against the country's interests, as you seem to think people on Welfare must. Welfare may or may not benefit the country in your opinion but whether it does or doesn't is no reason to deny people on it the franchise, just as it's no reason to deny the vote to people who are female or have AIDS or any other irrelevant thing that is totally your opinion and nothing else..
Like members of Congress, they will only vote to feed themselves at someone else's expense. I believe in the other system that only property owners vote. Most of the laws passed.locally, affect only them when it comes to cost. That unemployed would vote to take another's house if it were on a ballot. See? Isn't this the greatest nation on the planet where 20% of the nation feeds, clothes, and houses the rest?
And what? Man who don't receive welfare and work on his job for many years, have a family and want to spend all "welfare" money on creating more jobs, but there is only one problem - unemployed people often unemployed only because of their laziness. man who receive welfare and do nothing to find a job - it's obvious that he will vote only for candidate who will give him more money. Wanna see another welfare king as a president? Good luck.
Being a liberal has nothing to do with communism. That's something that has been attached to it in order to demonize it.
So people on welfare are ignorant and disloyal? I'm not playing dumb. I'm trying to get you to understand how dumb what you're saying is. People on welfare, if they vote at all, (most don't) can be just as patriotic as anyone with a job, and probably more than many of the very wealthy who really only seem to have their own interests at heart.
People on Welfare aren't, usually, Congress critters, thank god. The only way an unemployed person could take somebody's house would be if the unemployed outnumbered the employed by a substantial margin, and if that situation ever obtains they are just as likely to kill the home owner as well as take his house. If you want the poor to be less powerful try to avoid having so many of them. Welfare makes the poor expensive to the rich and this makes them try to have less poor, which is beneficial to everyone. Your voting plan allows the rich to ignore the poor, a situation which the shortsighted rich always clamor for, until the poor kill them No, it's not obvious. Many people vote against their own interests all the time in the belief that it will help the country. Otherwise the Republican Party and Republicans would not exist. Now if only we could get their opinions to jibe with reality as well as their misguided patriotism Most people on Welfare DO work. Most others have been laid off or are sick. I don't think we'd have nearly the level of patriotism you Republicans take for granted if we took away a person's right to vote because his company went bankrupt or he got cancer.
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/07/...ter-months-away-finds-people-living-in-house/ now this is the epitome of Liberal thinking...it has happened before. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ida-home-Afghan-war-veteran-refuse-leave.html regardless of your position, these owners had to fight in court to get back what was theirs....typical Prog Libs think everything belongs to them