davis_square | Just for some perspective...

Well, for starters, those who are under 18 and are felons...

Plus... everyone else who either lives here and isn't a human, or "lives" here but isn't a "resident" are being excluded, too. People who work here, but don't live here can't vote here even though they might spend much of their lives here, people who are birds can't vote here, people who live in more than one place but are only allowed to register to vote in one of those places might not be allowed to vote here, and people who are illegal aliens aren't allowed to vote here, and even some people who just didn't have the resources to register weeks ahead of the election can't vote in that election, even if they wanted to.

people who are birds. huh.

We prefer to be referred to as People Living with Birdism.

Nice icon for it.

people who are birds

I don't even know what to say about this.

Look, the birds don't let us vote in their elections, and we don't let them vote in the human elections. I think it's fair.

They don't have a choice but to let us vote in their politics. If we want to rezone their bird housing to put up a condo for humans, we outvote them, pretty much every time.

Well, we can't stop them from shitting on our cars, either!

Get rid of your car. Solves the problem nicely. :-)

My car? Don't have one.

Doesn't stop them from shitting on our property, to which I'm sure you'll respond "give up your property", right, Don Quixote?

And our heads! Sure, sure, "wear a hat," but then the hat gets it :( :( Frigging birds and their shunning of modern sanitation.

There is no voting when bird and human societies attempt to cohabit. The birds rule. I know this from long-standing personal experience. I am their willing slave.

I see through your cunning username.

It was one of the terms under which I am allowed to serve my masters.

That's correct: we do not allow people who have not reached an age to enter into contracts decide on the social contract of ruling us.

I think that's perfectly reasonable.

Additionally, we do not allow people who have shown that they have a low regard for the law participate in electing those who write and enforce the law - that would be like having the foxes guarding the henhouse.

I think you're confusing breaking the law with getting convicted. By your argument, many of our elected officials shouldn't be allowed to even vote. These laws also vary considerably by state -- when I lived in RI, our mayor was a convicted felon, but it was just a violent crime, not a drug offense, so I guess that makes it okay.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1553510,00.html

Thanks for the link.

Only presently incarcerated felons cannot vote. A person convicted of a felony who is not incarcerated can vote.

As for people under 18, the belief is that they lack the knowledge to enter into a binding contract, and likewise, lack the knowledge to make an informed decision about voting.

Aside from the non human voting, I still fail to see who is excluded. You can't have non-residents voting in elections.

Non-citizens (including legal ones) are excluded. A reasonable argument can be made to allow them to vote in local elections.

Let's set aside non US Citizens who would otherwise be Somerville residents.

The argument against letting non local residents vote is to prevent outside forces from interfering with local elections. Moreover, any person of legal voting age is or readily can be a resident somewhere. Either become a resident of Somerville (easy) or vote in your original location (equally easy).

Let's assume the following hypothetical: Let's say Massachusetts never legalized equal marriage. Say Somerville wanted to legalize equal marriage within the City of Somerville, and this was perfectly legal to do if a referendum passed. Can you imagine the outside wingnuts flocking to vote in our local election to overrule legitimate local vote on the matter?

Edited 2009-11-04 20:48 (UTC)

That sort of thing was a major issue in the 19th century. There were people crossing state lines just to vote in an election on a variety of issues. It really mucked up the legal wrangling around slavery. The bottom line is, if you allow non-residents to vote you open up a major can of worms.

I don't think non-residents of Somerville should vote in Somerville elections either -- but I do think non-citizens who are Somerville residents should be able to vote here.

Who said anything about non local residents? I was referring specifically to the group you 'set aside' -- non-citizens who live in Somerville. I'd like to see them be eligible to vote here.

Edited 2013-10-02 04:35 (UTC)

I can, it'd be like the Kansas and Nebraska slavery votes.

Just for some perspective...

Re: Exactly who is being excluded here?

Re: Exactly who is being excluded here?

no subject

no subject

Re: Exactly who is being excluded here?

Best Comment. Evar.

Re: Best Comment. Evar.

Re: Best Comment. Evar.

Sure you can!

Re: Sure you can!

Re: Sure you can!

Re: Sure you can!

Re: Exactly who is being excluded here?

Re: Exactly who is being excluded here?

Re: Exactly who is being excluded here?

Re: Exactly who is being excluded here?

Re: Exactly who is being excluded here?

Re: Exactly who is being excluded here?

Felons can vote in Massachusetts

Re: Felons can vote in Massachusetts

One person one vote

Re: One person one vote

Re: One person one vote

Re: One person one vote

Re: One person one vote