Originally Posted by Guest

And who and how would such a law be enforced?
Finger in purple dye?
No purple finger then you are penalized.....cut off finger!
Issue everybody a voter ID? We know how popular that one is eh?

You mean the party that does not want voter ID would want everybody to vote.
Just how would they know?

Stop and think about it. Obama did not. Like a lot of other things in his speeches, he presents waht he thinks are cutesy or presidential sounding. And then does nothing, unless it serves his agenda.

If he and many others would think about the unrealistic(ness) of the intent.
Check out the following presentation on voter participation:
2014 midterm election turnout lowest in 70 years
Now just how does the talker in chief expect to get these numbers up.
It is a shame that approximately 50% of this country's voting population do not.

I know if you don't vote you lose yout govrnment handout benefits!
Or we take your cell phone or cigarettes or booze away for 12 months.

As usual.....just like hope and change sounded good in a speech. This lark on voting is no different.

All very good points, but wait until after the 2016 presidential election to talk about turn out.

Women have been waiting patiently for over 200 years to take over running this country, and women make up 53% of the electorate.

How do you think having Hilary Clinton, the first woman at the top of the presidential ticket, on the ballot will effect voter turnout?

Someone said that obama will figure a way to stay in office.Simple with the race riots that are going on as in Ferguson all he will have to do is declare Martial Law and bingo setting president stays,I have thought this is his plan all along. You dont think it could happen,with the problems this country is in I do. I dont understand why congress has allowed this president to continue. I dont care demo or repb. do they all have their heads up some where.

Originally Posted by Guest

All very good points, but wait until after the 2016 presidential election to talk about turn out.

Women have been waiting patiently for over 200 years to take over running this country, and women make up 53% of the electorate.

How do you think having Hilary Clinton, the first woman at the top of the presidential ticket, on the ballot will effect voter turnout?

Please don't allow us to think the only reason you would vote for Hillary Clinton is because she is a woman....please!

Will it affect the voter turn out. You damn bet it will. And not for the reason you have concluded.

If you all are so impatient for a woman president, why are you not looking for the very best candidate you can find?
There are certainly much better, honest, younger in thinking candidates in the party...either party.

Do you not care that she uses, abuses and hides behind the law at her pleasure?
Do you not care she has some pretty nasty skeletons in her closet like Benhazzi and the recent email debacle? And lots more going back in time.

Some say Obama got elected because he was black. The same as you stated the country has waited so many hundreds of years for a black president.
That is his ONLY qualification in that case. And see what a disater this country is domestically and internationally.

Don't make the mistake and become a party lemming just because she is a woman.....she will not be representing womens rights or what ever you think a "she" will bring anymore than any other president.

Keep your vision but please go find a better candidate than a crook and a liar......both traits of most politicians....but there are some newer recent generation candidates that are not a slave to Washington politics as usual. That is all Clinton knows....cronism to the max.

Mandating that millions of uninformed and, in some cases genuinely ignorant , people vote is yet another example of deranged Left Wing "thinking" that further puts the nails into Americas coffin

Originally Posted by Guest

In place of mandatory voting, how about mandatory not stopping people from voting?

You mean like the intimidation of Republican voters in Philadelphia?

Black Panthers ‘intimidate’ voters at polls

Originally Posted by Guest

Please don't allow us to think the only reason you would vote for Hillary Clinton is because she is a woman....please!

Will it affect the voter turn out. You damn bet it will. And not for the reason you have concluded.

If you all are so impatient for a woman president, why are you not looking for the very best candidate you can find?
There are certainly much better, honest, younger in thinking candidates in the party...either party.

Do you not care that she uses, abuses and hides behind the law at her pleasure?
Do you not care she has some pretty nasty skeletons in her closet like Benhazzi and the recent email debacle? And lots more going back in time.

Some say Obama got elected because he was black. The same as you stated the country has waited so many hundreds of years for a black president.
That is his ONLY qualification in that case. And see what a disater this country is domestically and internationally.

Don't make the mistake and become a party lemming just because she is a woman.....she will not be representing womens rights or what ever you think a "she" will bring anymore than any other president.

Keep your vision but please go find a better candidate than a crook and a liar......both traits of most politicians....but there are some newer recent generation candidates that are not a slave to Washington politics as usual. That is all Clinton knows....cronism to the max.

Please list all the "better, honest, younger in thinking candidates" out there to take a look at, preferably one's who have support of 80% plus of their party and the one's who top the opposition by at least 10% points?

Originally Posted by Guest

Please list all the "better, honest, younger in thinking candidates" out there to take a look at, preferably one's who have support of 80% plus of their party and the one's who top the opposition by at least 10% points?

I don't need the list. I know I would not care what the numbers say about my candidate.
If the are not qualified, which she isn't;
Or dishonest, which she is;
Or a liar, which she is;
Or has an ethics questionable background, which she does;
Those traits do not earn my vote.

The numbers you quote above do not make her a viable candidate. All they do is assume it is good enough for the LIV's (low information voters).
The same crowd that CHOSE the then unkown Obama over Clinton (when she also had the same type numbers above).
Now just how did that happen?
Where were all you women who have been waiting so long for this woman???
How did you all allow an unknown, unqualified candidate to do that?

Originally Posted by Guest

I don't need the list. I know I would not care what the numbers say about my candidate.
If the are not qualified, which she isn't;
Or dishonest, which she is;
Or a liar, which she is;
Or has an ethics questionable background, which she does;
Those traits do not earn my vote.

The numbers you quote above do not make her a viable candidate. All they do is assume it is good enough for the LIV's (low information voters).
The same crowd that CHOSE the then unkown Obama over Clinton (when she also had the same type numbers above).
Now just how did that happen?
Where were all you women who have been waiting so long for this woman???
How did you all allow an unknown, unqualified candidate to do that?

Couldn't come up with any names of anyone who could possibly go head to head with Hillary Clinton, eh?

What part of I don't need to look for others did not come across?
If you are happy with her so be it.
There are better than her democrats and even some females. Maybe it is a party thing that you don't push back and demand better.
You believers could not pull it off in 2008 and were shut out by a virtual unknown and unqualified dark horse.
How did you all let that happen then.
She is more damaged this time around so watch out for another dark horse to bump her out, again!
She may be your choice for whatever reason. It remains to be seen if she is your party's choice when it counts. The party will only back whoever they think can win. By that criteria she is not the pre ordained candidateIn 2007 she also looked like she was it. She was not as it turned out.

Frankly I laughed when listening to the news clip of Obama suggesting that voting needs to be mandatory. Heck a look at the electorate and you see many who shouldn't be allowed to breed let alone vote and I am talking about Waters World interviews with college students. Waters to student Obama appointed Kanyae West as Ambassador to England. How do you think he will fare? Oh Kanaye has a way with words he 'so charming that job will fit him well"

Originally Posted by Guest

Frankly I laughed when listening to the news clip of Obama suggesting that voting needs to be mandatory. Heck a look at the electorate and you see many who shouldn't be allowed to breed let alone vote and I am talking about Waters World interviews with college students. Waters to student Obama appointed Kanyae West as Ambassador to England. How do you think he will fare? Oh Kanaye has a way with words he 'so charming that job will fit him well"

Waters World did the dumb interviews with college students who gave the dumbest answers to simple questions. Remember, Jay Leno did the same thing on his show segment called "Jay Walking". You would wonder how stupid those people are in real life.

On Waters World - as on Jay Walking - the students know if they give the right answer to the simple questions that they will not get their "spot" on television. In other words, the kids are throwing it so they can get on television.

Would you waste your time watching a student say that the Atlantic Ocean is the body of water that borders the entire Eastern Coast of America? Of course you wouldn't. However, she says (while rolling her eyes) "Lake Erie" and you get a laugh at how dumb she is and make comments and remember it.

Folks, it is a put on!!!!

We have not heard the Republicans out there give the name of one viable candidate that they believe can honestly win over the Democrat candidate for President in 2016. Yes, we are assuming that the Democrat candidate is Mrs. Clinton.

Remember, the Republicans do not have an inclusive member base, so do not give a name like Condi Rice. That would never make it with the old white men in charge of your party.

Originally Posted by Guest

Waters World did the dumb interviews with college students who gave the dumbest answers to simple questions. Remember, Jay Leno did the same thing on his show segment called "Jay Walking". You would wonder how stupid those people are in real life.

On Waters World - as on Jay Walking - the students know if they give the right answer to the simple questions that they will not get their "spot" on television. In other words, the kids are throwing it so they can get on television.

Would you waste your time watching a student say that the Atlantic Ocean is the body of water that borders the entire Eastern Coast of America? Of course you wouldn't. However, she says (while rolling her eyes) "Lake Erie" and you get a laugh at how dumb she is and make comments and remember it.

Folks, it is a put on!!!!

My friend, YOU need to get out more! A HUGE swath of America are absolute idiots that have barely mastered the steps involved in breeding. The Villages is not representative of the US. I challenge you to take a leisurely drive through south Chicago, south-central LA or several ENTIRE states that I'll decline to name.

Originally Posted by Guest

We have not heard the Republicans out there give the name of one viable candidate that they believe can honestly win over the Democrat candidate for President in 2016. Yes, we are assuming that the Democrat candidate is Mrs. Clinton.

Remember, the Republicans do not have an inclusive member base, so do not give a name like Condi Rice. That would never make it with the old white men in charge of your party.

Typical twisting of the discussion and race baiting. Do you ever have a point to make that is just a stated opinion instead of continually being derogatory and crude?

And yes we recognize that disagreeing with your positions is all it takes to earn the belittling catharsis that never ever changes....no matter the subject.

Originally Posted by Guest

Now obama wants to make a law you must vote. Next he will tell you how to vote. Then he will take your right to vote away. So get out there and vote and not for the democrats. See how bad that will be I just told you how to vote did you like it.

The entire premise of this thread is bogus, the typical Obama Derangement Syndrome. Take something he said, twist it then pile on lots of conspiracy theories and throw in some racism for fun.

Obama answered a citizen question in Cleveland about Washington dysfunction and Citizens United. He mentioned several ways to improve the dysfunction and take big money out of politics. He mentioned in his answer that in Australia and other countries there is mandatory voting. He never proposed such a measure here. He also mentioned gerrymandering and other issues with meaningful elections. But go ahead and get angry and the POTUS who speaks much more clearly than you listen or comprehend.

In Australia, and some other countries, there’s mandatory voting. It would be transformative if everybody voted. That would counteract money more than anything. If everybody voted, then it would completely change the political map in this country, because the people who tend not to vote are young; they're lower income; they're skewed more heavily towards immigrant groups and minority groups; and they're often the folks who are -- they're scratching and climbing to get into the middle class. And they're working hard, and there’s a reason why some folks try to keep them away from the polls. We should want to get them into the polls
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...club-cleveland

If you read somewhere in that comment that he "wants to make a law you must vote" as the OP wrote and so many of you believe, it is a sad commentary on your ability to understand beyond what Fox News tells you to believe.