Should Children As Young As 16 Be Allowed To Vote?

[timothyu]

Should Children As Young As 16 Be Allowed To Vote?

Is there an app for that?

 

[LivingWordUnity]

"Should Children As Young As 16 Be Allowed To Vote?"

No.

 

[Pommer]

"Should Children As Young As 16 Be Allowed To Vote?"

No.

Our Republic elected its last President with just 19.44% of the population.
I’d rather see incentives for getting more of the electorate out to the polls than a blanket lowering of age to secure better participation in our democracy.
You voted? Great attach your receipt of voting to your taxes and get...oh, say, $500.00 tax credit (an additional half-$K in your refund?).

 

[timothyu]

I’d rather see incentives for getting more of the electorate out to the polls than a blanket lowering of age to secure better participation in our democracy.

How about something worth voting for?

Persuading the people to vote against their own best interests has been the awesome genius of the
American political elite from the beginning. ...Gore Vidal

 

[GoldenBoy89]

"Should Children As Young As 16 Be Allowed To Vote?"

No.

Why not? We already let them drive, work and marry.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

"Should Children As Young As 16 Be Allowed To Vote?"

No.

Given that Boomers both believe, and spread, patently false information at a higher rate than any other demographic, it would appear that it's not the 16-18 age group people need to worry about.

Boomers Share the Most Fake News on Facebook, Study Finds

More than 90 percent of Facebook users in the study did not share misinformation to their friends’ feeds, according to the research. Of those that did, however, the study found that age was the most significant factor. The study found that "the oldest Americans, especially those over 65, were more likely to share fake news to their Facebook friends.” This was true even when holding other factors like ideology and partisanship constant.

The researchers also found that conservatives were more likely to share fake news than liberals, but note that this may be due to an overall pro-Trump slant in fake news and not an inherent quality of conservatives.

 

[Redac]

Given that Boomers both believe, and spread, patently false information at a higher rate than any other demographic, it would appear that it's not the 16-18 age group people need to worry about.

Boomers Share the Most Fake News on Facebook, Study Finds

More than 90 percent of Facebook users in the study did not share misinformation to their friends’ feeds, according to the research. Of those that did, however, the study found that age was the most significant factor. The study found that "the oldest Americans, especially those over 65, were more likely to share fake news to their Facebook friends.” This was true even when holding other factors like ideology and partisanship constant.

The researchers also found that conservatives were more likely to share fake news than liberals, but note that this may be due to an overall pro-Trump slant in fake news and not an inherent quality of conservatives.

Boomers being kind of dumb isn't really an argument that 16 year-olds should be given the vote.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Boomers being kind of dumb isn't really an argument that 16 year-olds should be given the vote.

If being ignorant/misinformed/easily swayed by emotion/illogical/etc... (all of the terms conservatives like to use to describe left leaning young people) aren't disqualifying factors, than what should?

Any argument one can make for why "16 year olds shouldn't be allowed to vote", one could easily make about boomers, right?

Let's not mince words about where the attitudes are coming from in this thread. The ONLY reason the GOP doesn't want 16 year olds to vote is because they're not likely to vote their way.

If the 16-17 demographic in America was >= 80% conservative, you can believe that the GOP would be pushing for their suffrage in a heartbeat.

 

[Pommer]

If being ignorant/misinformed/easily swayed by emotion/illogical/etc... (all of the terms conservatives like to use to describe left leaning young people) aren't disqualifying factors, than what should?

Any argument one can make for why "16 year olds shouldn't be allowed to vote", one could easily make about boomers, right?

Let's not mince words about where the attitudes are coming from in this thread. The ONLY reason the GOP doesn't want 16 year olds to vote is because they're not likely to vote their way.

If the 16-17 demographic in America was >= 80% conservative, you can believe that the GOP would be pushing for their suffrage in a heartbeat.

Remember kids, the Boomers grew up with the air just chalk full of tetraethyl lead fumes!
The generation who put human beings on the moon handed over the reins of government to people who can’t even agree on whether to “build the wall”!

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Why not? We already let them drive, work and marry.

Because I can still remember when I was 16, that's why not.

 

[Redac]

If being ignorant/misinformed/easily swayed by emotion/illogical/etc... (all of the terms conservatives like to use to describe left leaning young people) aren't disqualifying factors, than what should?

Apologies in advance if I've misread your position, but you're the one arguing for expansion of the franchise. You tell me where the line is.

Any argument one can make for why "16 year olds shouldn't be allowed to vote", one could easily make about boomers, right?

There are arguments against 16 year olds voting that one couldn't make against boomers.

Let's not mince words about where the attitudes are coming from in this thread. The ONLY reason the GOP doesn't want 16 year olds to vote is because they're not likely to vote their way.

If the 16-17 demographic in America was >= 80% conservative, you can believe that the GOP would be pushing for their suffrage in a heartbeat.

And by the same token, the only reason the Democratic Party is pushing this is because they're impatient for boomers to die off, and they're cognizant enough of youth demographics to know that they'd get a lot of those votes.

Obviously this is a partisan move. If that's the angle we're going to approach this from, then this should be opposed simply because it would benefit Democrats far too much. If this is supposed to be an actual discussion about the merits of lowering the voting age, then that becomes somewhat less relevant, does it not?