To Vote or Not to Vote?

A liberal nation follows a "for the people, by the people" mentaility.  To this extent, a populace should not be denied the right to vote.  However, the argument for an "enlightened" group of leaders reminds me of the age-old term, "universal manhood suffrage," which of course, excluded un-landed men/farmers, women, African Americans, and other minorities.

Although many proponents of the "educated" vote deny their favoritism of the gentry, this is a complex argument in what determines "representation" and what determines "educated."  To me, representation is the whole populace, from the TV-trailer man to the Harvard graduate.  All have the right to voice their opinions, even if they lack substantial evidence.  For example, consider students in a classroom:  if a student is not as informed as the others, should he/she still speak?  Is there such thing as a stupid question . . . stupid vote?  Arguably, yes, but does he/she hold that right to speak?  Furthermore, this leads to the question of education:  should it be determined by its cost, life experiences (logic), intution, or a combination of the three?

All Americans have to deal with the consequences of the vote.  It is a collateral decision of the nation.  Yet, it is also a duty for the common citizen to be "knowledgeable" about the political process for the most effective government.  Going back to the classroom example, all students have the right to learn.  There should be less blame and more responsibility in educating our neighbors. 

On the extreme end, when people favor the "elitist" vote, they may favor "popular sovereignty," which is not always the answer.  Consider the political parties with their "correct," popular possibilites.  Meanwhile, there is always a place for more representation, as America musters patience for that third-party candidate. . . .

Links:
~  interesting consideration about the "mentally challenged": http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1320290/is_an_uninformed_vote_better_than_a.html
~  it may be a natural phenomenon that we all make judgements:  http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100615105330.htm (NOTE:  this article reminded me of the book, Blink)
~  consequences without education:  "Get-out-the-vote efforts have admirable goals of involving more people in the democratic process, but they neglect to follow up by educating voters, in addition to encouraging voters.  Encouragement is good, but without education, it turns get out the vote into a pissing contest between the political parties to see who can sign up the most people." Get-out-the-vote efforts have admirable goals of involving more people in the democratic process, but they neglect to follow up by educating voters, in addition to encouraging voters." (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/25/politics/uwire/main4545361.shtml)