Should the voting age be changed to 16+?

Started by shaynebmxxx17 pages

in a way i wanna support you people saying that the age should be down to 16 because im 16 and i want to be a part of this upcoing vote but on the other hand out of the all of teenagers out there 16+ most of them dont even know who the candidates are, and if they know them they dont know there views... teens are soo highly impressionable that it would almost turn into oh i voted for this guy you should to.. it would be a disaster if 16+ could vote. we just arent ready(not saying that many 18 years are either.. but you get the point)

Originally posted by debbiejo
Most sixteen year olds are not informed enough to make a logical vote.
Ironic, isn't it?

Of course democracy is bullshit, we know that, but to pretend that those under 18 are for some reason worse as those above 18 is ridiculous, and a lie.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Most sixteen year olds are not informed enough to make a logical vote.
Most people are not informed enough to make a logical vote.

well thats what im saying.. for the number of people that are informed the number of people uninformed outweighs that by far. like even majority of 18+ probably arent ready. its just a matter of taking the time to do your homework on candidates and people dont even wanna take that time anymore. there the last to research but usually the first to throw blames

Originally posted by shaynebmxxx
in a way i wanna support you people saying that the age should be down to 16 because im 16 and i want to be a part of this upcoing vote but on the other hand out of the all of teenagers out there 16+ most of them dont even know who the candidates are, and if they know them they dont know there views... teens are soo highly impressionable that it would almost turn into oh i voted for this guy you should to.. it would be a disaster if 16+ could vote. we just arent ready(not saying that many 18 years are either.. but you get the point)
Yeah, the people who don't know anything about the candidates, are most likely the ones who don't vote. About 1 in 3 Americans voted in the last election. And that's the highest ever in US history. Not everyone votes, those who aren't into politics are usually the ones who don't. And I strongly don't think that changing the voters to 16+ will suddenly elect a really bad president.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Yeah, the people who don't know anything about the candidates, are most likely the ones who don't vote. About 1 in 3 Americans voted in the last election. And that's the highest ever in US history. Not everyone votes, those who aren't into politics are usually the ones who don't. And I strongly don't think that changing the voters to 16+ will suddenly elect a really bad president.
In the US certainly not a worse one.

in a nutshell.. majority of people as it is now dont give a flying f*ck aout politics. they hate it. so lowering the voting would only cause more senseless votes to be casted. as many good votes that would be casted it just wouldnt be worth it.

Originally posted by Bardock42
In the US certainly not a worse one.
Yes.

Originally posted by shaynebmxxx
in a nutshell.. majority of people as it is now dont give a flying f*ck aout politics. they hate it. so lowering the voting would only cause more senseless votes to be casted. as many good votes that would be casted it just wouldnt be worth it.
In a nutshell, all it would do is make more voters. Now, for a country that has a reputation of electing bad presidents, it needs more voters. Especially a generation under the Bush Administration.

well if the people arent informed then whats the point of them voting? if you went and took a poll im sure majprity of them would be clueless

Originally posted by lord xyz
Most people are not informed enough to make a logical vote.
True, true, true.

People should get an evaluation of knowledge first.....Yeah, that's the ticket.

Originally posted by debbiejo
True, true, true.

People should get an evaluation of knowledge first.....Yeah, that's the ticket.

You'd exclude yourself just like that?

Noble.

Originally posted by debbiejo
True, true, true.

People should get an evaluation of knowledge first.....Yeah, that's the ticket.

Well, that would be too fiddly. How about good candidates that are smart and good at convincing the people to vote for them by being honest and intelectual.

Wouldn't work. If one is not current and can't step outside their world, as many 16 year olds, then it would be of no use. Unfortunately that age bracket has a harder time with understanding life let alone the whole world of politics and the out comes of it all.

You two should just not speak. At least not with each other.

Huh? Well in my age...(Hehe.) people should not talk if they are ignorant of a subject.

*Grabs cane*

how about this for a change.

the candidates are honest about EVERYTHING..hm wouldnt that be the day? then no one would be so confused on what to do

Sense I hate democracy, no, I don't think teenagers have any right to vote. Unless they planned to vote for who I'd vote for. 😉

Originally posted by Captain King
Sense I hate democracy, no, I don't think teenagers have any right to vote. Unless they planned to vote for who I'd vote for. 😉

You shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah, see, that line of thought has the problem that 32 year olds are retarded too. So it doesn't make for a good argument.

That's exactly what I was implying, since people with Down Syndrome don't spontaneously combust at the age of 18.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
That's exactly what I was implying, since people with Down Syndrome don't spontaneously combust at the age of 18.

Hmm, I took that differently, but good point on you then. Good point.