>Then why are you misrepresenting it to mean something that it doesn't? I didn't mispresent anything, I've been consistent and clear about my view of the senat

>Then why are you misrepresenting it to mean something that it doesn't? I didn't mispresent anything, I've been consistent and clear about my view of the senate. >Please name a democracy that has unlimited voting rights. It's not my position that voting rights should be unlimited. I was only pointing out that your own list of bad things were all about giving people who don't have a say about the government whose rules they must live by, a say in that government by vote. >The purpose of those most basic restrictions is do that society does not become influenced by the criminal elements This is historical laughable, the purpose of most restrictions is to limit the vote of marginalized groups, usually by race. For just one example, Step 1: Pass laws making weed a felony. Step 2: Focus all law enforcement efforts on marginalized groups smoking weed but let the kids in suburbs and college dorms smoke all they want. Step 3: Harshly punish marginalized groups by making them felons. Step 4: Strip them of the right to vote.