A Quote by H. L. Mencken

Voting is simply a way of determining which side is the stronger without putting it to the test of fighting. — © H. L. Mencken
Voting is simply a way of determining which side is the stronger without putting it to the test of fighting.
I think the American people deserve to have the issues debated, regardless of which side they're on, so that they are fully aware of what their representatives and senators are voting for and voting against.
Yes, there are lots of individual exceptions. But no one has ever done a study about voting intention without ascertaining that the biggest determining factor is your income and your wealth.
The NSF study projected a shortfall of 675,000 scientists and engineers without considering the future demand for such individuals in the marketplace. It simply observed a decline in the number of 22-year-olds and projected that this demographic trend would result in a huge shortfall. This could be termed the supply-side theory of labor market analysis. But making labor market projections without considering the demand side of the equation doesn't pass the laugh test with experts in the field.
By voting for a candidate, we're not endorsing a particular lifestyle. We're simply voting on the issues.
In your deliberations, when seeking to determine the military conditions, let them be made the basis of a comparison, in this wise: which of the two generals has the most ability? on which side is Discipline most rigorously enforced? which army is stronger? on which side are the officers and men more highly trained? in which army is there the greater constancy both in reward and punishment?
By applying blockchain technology to voting platforms, we can prevent tampering with online voting, which will increase confidence in the voting results of voters and residents in Seoul.
... it's simply wrong to always order [kids] to stop that fighting. There are times when one child is simply defending his rights and damned well should be fighting.
But the way they phrase those things when you get to the voting booth, you don't know which way you're voting, cause it's like, "Should we not eat unbabies not on this not day?" .... So you vote no on it, and then it's on the news the next day. "Well, 74% of Americans have decided it's time to eat babies."
I think nuance is very important to have in the conversation, nuance that's been lacking for a long time. A lot of voting organizations only exist every four years, putting all this money into "your voice is important!" Wouldn't that be nice, if that's all it took? Voting is the first political action for most people. But if you don't follow up then voting is not actual participation but just a one-off.
There is a Persian proverb: 'To test that which has been tested is ignorance.' To try to test something without the means of testing is even worse.
Do not turn the power of your mind upon others, but turn it upon yourself in such a way that it will make you stronger, more positive, more capable, and more efficient, and as you develop in this manner, success must come of itself. There is only one way by which you can influence others legitimately, and that is through the giving of instruction, but in that case, there is no desire to influence. You desire simply to impart knowledge and information, and you exercise a most desirable influence without desiring to do so.
As a blind voter, I'm strongly opposed to the paperless e-voting machines that the NFB is trying to force onto us. I want a voting system that is accessible to as many voters as possible and that also produces an audit trail. The paperless machines are simply the wrong approach, and I support the County's efforts to try to find a better way.
I don't think everyone should vote. If you have to be dragged into the polls, carried into the polls and smelling salts have to be used, you probably shouldn't be voting. However, we shouldn't be putting up barriers to voting that target certain groups.
You're not just voting for an individual, in my judgment, you're voting for an agenda. You're voting for a platform. You're voting for a political philosophy.
It all comes down to serving the one who are fighting along side you,watching your back, putting a weapon in your hand when you need it most.
If Parliament is voting overwhelmingly against leaving the European Union without a deal but is voting in favour of a softer Brexit, then I don't think it's sustainable to ignore Parliament's position and therefore leave without a deal.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!