Will's Link
I'm curious to see the thoughts of the CF on this idea of lowering the voting age to 16?
Personally, I dont like it. Kids at 16 are, in my opinion at least, not contextually aware enough of the world as a whole, how they contribute, what their roles may be able to be, how issues integrate with their lives, history, life experience etc etc etc. In short, they are at peak "I know a lot" while also being a peak "WAY over estimate what I know a lot about" levels!
When I saw this on the news last night, I was struck by two things during interviews with kids. The kids were certain they had the understanding, knowledge, and need to take part in voting. So certain, that I was assured they were great kids, intellectually smart, likely going to do great things in the world... But also, that they were not really ready.
I dont have it at my fingertips, but some psych research points out how the brains of teens are about 3years BEHIND where they were a few decades ago. Less responsibility, more info at their fingertips etc all being factors. So one could suggest this is essentially akin to allowing 13 year olds to vote 20 years ago.
Now, if you told me that raising the voting age to 20 or 21 may be on offer... ok. Interesting premise, though hard to jive with enlisting soldiers at 18, who couldnt vote in that situation. So, it feels like we are stuck at 18 to me...
But going down, to younger age groups. No. That is a bad idea.
Fire away CF!
Karl Marx is probably in whatever communist purgatory he resides in with Das Kapital turned to the centerfold, a box of kleenex, a pack of smokes and a satisfied glow on, along with a couple of others on here.
You know (or should know) that the '16 to vote' thing is all about votes for the party pushing it. You must have missed the memo, you are already on the "hunts AND owns firearms" list, now this! You can soon expect a call, and probably a visit from the MA DNC, they might even propose a re-education program for you.
Whether you know it or not, you're being slowly converted by the CF, oh sure, you still recoil at the thought of being known as a Conservative. That's OK, ... first, you'll start to feel increasingly uncomfortable with the idea of killing babies after they are born, then the idea of repealing the 2nd Amendment will make you mad ... before you know it you'll start to feel comfortable with being referred to as a Libertarian ... that's how it starts.
I am ordering your "Trump 2020" hat as we speak.
Hmmm...what's the difference?
They realize normal, educated and informed people will not vote for them.
That's the only reason they are for Open Borders and now advocate for the young and the stupid (Sorry for the Redundancy) to be added to the voter roles
Brootsky you are an absolute GENIUS!
My wife's little cousin is nearing the end of college and SO SO smart with the ways of the world and how everything should be fair and equal,etc. I just laugh.. I cannot wait to ask her about this after she starts pumping 10s of thousands in taxes to BS people and causes.
If you produce nothing and contribute nothing for the common good, why should you be able to have a say in how the money which comes from those who do is spent?
Somewhere along the line...the Dems realized they were cutting their own throats...now they even get dead people to vote!
Wouldn't work today though because only the wealthy few would be allowed to vote.
I call BS!
Most Americans own property, be it their homes or in their IRAs/401(k)s.
If they also pay income taxes or property taxes, which most do, they therefore clearly have a stake in the game.
....and vote TWICE or more!
If they'd stop killing their offspring, they would have plenty of growing voters.
-Yeah but in a culture of life, their gains would be far outpaced by those of the opposition party.
Pretty sure the property in question is direct tax pay property you control or are financially obligated to.
You don't think the likes of Soros wouldn't buy up as much property as possible to control politics?
Money talks and bullshit walks...
Looks like everyone feels the same way - leave it as is... Or make it older :)! I'm cool with a lot of liberal ideas. This one is at best changing something that isnt broken and at worst illogical on many levels. Ooph.
Interesting. Maybe to vote when under 18, you need to take the equivalent of the citizenship test? If you can pass it at 12, then you vote.
Opens up another question - we don't ever lose our right to vote in old age - even if we become unaware of the world as a whole. Good thing, as the bowsite cabal would lose 90% of its voting privileges...
We work a lot with special needs kids and adults. One of the students voted in 2016 after being coached by his parents to vote for trump. The student didn't meet your definition above (and never will).
If you own a home, you own property and you pay property taxes as a result.
If you have an IRA or a 401(k), you own property. You WILL pay taxes on that property when you start withdrawing money from those accounts and the Feds REQUIRE you to start withdrawing money in the year in which you turn 70 1/2.
I don’t think anyone keeps track of it. . . .
I actually did a limited guardianship not too long ago where we specifically limited the guardianship so an older lady would retain her voting rights. It was/is very important to her
I'm still ok with NOT letting people under 18 vote though - assuming normal health etc. Makes zero sense to me.
MN is not that way. Basically, you can vote unless a judge has specifically taken that right away from you via a court order.
