[Jtsummers]

rayiner has previously written that he thinks all non-property owners in the US to be disenfranchised.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46885305

> Instead, the electorate should be narrowed to property owning people who have an IQ above 85 (within one SD of median) and two grandparents born in the U.S. (so culturally assimilated).

Really, nothing he writes is surprising.

[rayiner]

I believe in a country where the top 75% or so of people vote and that directly influences the administration of government. You want a country where 100% of people vote, but their vote is merely a suggestion to the credentialed professionals and lawyers that actually run the country. I am by far the more egalitarian one.

Sure, if you think Americans are sheep to be herded—what Woodrow Wilson called the “unphilosophical bulk of humanity”—by credentialed experts who make the important decisions, you have no problem with the dumbest, least responsible people voting. Because in your model voting is just a signal of approval/disapproval, not genuine self governance. You can’t afford to do that if you think the effect of people’s votes should be direct and not filtered through an expert class that second guesses them.

[idiotsecant]

Lol mad scramble to somehow justify being a complete scumbag. The only vote we should be taking away is mouth breathing fedoraposters like you.

[Jtsummers]

In your proposed change to who can vote, you'd not be able to vote and neither would your children. Does that mean you believe that you, and they, are part of the "unphilosophical bulk of humanity"? That you and they are among "the dumbest, least responsible people"?

I guess you don't even believe your own credentials as a lawyer make you qualified to vote.