CDZ Letting 16 year olds vote if they pass a test

[Crepitus]

I propose we make republicans take a very simple to vote. We will.show them 3 stories from 3 major news outlets and they have to correctly identify the real one.

What the hell does that have to do with knowledge of the government?

Oh, I forgot, you think the media is a branch of the government because you are an idiot who would easily fail this test.

No, it about being able to reliably tell truth from fiction.

 

[fncceo]

I propose we make republicans take a very simple to vote. We will.show them 3 stories from 3 major news outlets and they have to correctly identify the real one.

What the hell does that have to do with knowledge of the government?

Oh, I forgot, you think the media is a branch of the government because you are an idiot who would easily fail this test.

No, it about being able to reliably tell truth from fiction.

If I could tell truth from fiction it would destroy my love life. Thank you, no.

 

[Votto]

Would you be in favor of letting 16 year olds being allowed to vote if they passed a fairly difficult voter competency test that 85% of adults had failed in when given? Let's assume they could study for the test all they want, take it once a day like their driver's permit test, and therefore had to be knowledgeable and/or at least have the dedication to keep studying and trying again and again until they passed. There could even be an additional restriction that they have had a job at some point. When they turn 18, they can simply vote.

The Left is always trying to get as many ill informed voters as they can and give them as much power as they can. That way they can easily manipulate their votes through such things as demagoguery and giving away free stuff like Obama phones and entitlements

It used to be that men had to own property before voting to show that they were productive members of society with something at stake. Usually this then translated in relatively intelligent human beings and law abiding. Then they ended up letting everyone vote and even decreased the age from 21 to 18. Now they want to decrease it even further to 16?

The issue here is, the younger they are the more liberal they tend to be. They are fresh out of the liberal indoctrination mills of public education and college, so they lean Left.

However, those that are older gain life experience and soon realize that the things they were brain washed with was pure BS, so people then start to lean the other direction.

I can't tell you how many times I've heard Left wingers on this site wish more older people would die to make room for the younger Left wing voters.

Scary stuff..

 

[Votto]

A majority of the millenniums can't even name the Fifty states.

Wait! There are FIFTY states now? When did that happen?!

Yes, we are now down to 50 states.

I think 7 of them must have seceded from the union under Obama.

Well, Shit! And I was taught that Mexico was a state...

Maybe that was one of the 57 states Obama was referring to when he said we had 57.

So if Obama still thinks that, should he be allowed to vote?

 

[boedicca]

No. 16 year olds voting is a terrible idea.

I'll note the hypocrisy of the Left thinking that voter ID laws are somehow racist while supporting Voting Tests for 16 year olds. Are they going to charge the white 16 year olds a poll tax as well?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Would you be in favor of letting 16 year olds being allowed to vote if they passed a fairly difficult voter competency test that 85% of adults had failed in when given? Let's assume they could study for the test all they want, take it once a day like their driver's permit test, and therefore had to be knowledgeable and/or at least have the dedication to keep studying and trying again and again until they passed. There could even be an additional restriction that they have had a job at some point. When they turn 18, they can simply vote.

I'd have to be solidly imposed on ever making the right to vote contingent on passing any kind of “competency test”. No matter how good the intent, you know that any such test will eventually be abuse, in the manner that “literacy tests” were abused in the past, to selectively deny voting rights in order to skew the results of the election.

As far as voting age, I see no benefit in lowering it to include people who do not yet have any real-life experience. If anything, I'd rather see it raised, so that voters are more likely to have had the experience of holding down a job, trying to support themselves and possibly a family, and having to bear the burden of taxes and regulations imposed by government. Young people, who do not yet have this experience, I think would be more likely to vote out of idealism for policies that are harmful to those of us who have to try to make a living in The Real World.

 

[Votto]

No. 16 year olds voting is a terrible idea.

I'll note the hypocrisy of the Left thinking that voter ID laws are somehow racist while supporting Voting Tests for 16 year olds. Are they going to charge the white 16 year olds a poll tax as well?

Then again, with the government spending all the money for future generations without their consent, should toddlers be allowed to vote?

Even better, should parents with a kid get to vote twice?

 

[Coyote]

Would you be in favor of letting 16 year olds being allowed to vote if they passed a fairly difficult voter competency test that 85% of adults had failed in when given? Let's assume they could study for the test all they want, take it once a day like their driver's permit test, and therefore had to be knowledgeable and/or at least have the dedication to keep studying and trying again and again until they passed. There could even be an additional restriction that they have had a job at some point. When they turn 18, they can simply vote.

I'd have to be solidly imposed on ever making the right to vote contingent on passing any kind of “competency test”. No matter how good the intent, you know that any such test will eventually be abuse, in the manner that “literacy tests” were abused in the past, to selectively deny voting rights in order to skew the results of the election.

As far as voting age, I see no benefit in lowering it to include people who do not yet have any real-life experience. If anything, I'd rather see it raised, so that voters are more likely to have had the experience of holding down a job, trying to support themselves and possibly a family, and having to bear the burden of taxes and regulations imposed by government. Young people, who do not yet have this experience, I think would be more likely to vote out of idealism for policies that are harmful to those of us who have to try to make a living in The Real World.

I agree about the tests. Voting rights should never be contingent on a test.

In terms of age, 18 is good. That’s the age you can enlist. It would be wrong if some one were old enough to go to war but not old enough vote on those who would send him to war,

 

[Coyote]

Some here have forgotten you are in the CDZ. That means no insulting or flaming members. It also means you need to stay on topic. For the uninformed, that topic is lowering the voting age.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Would you be in favor of letting 16 year olds being allowed to vote if they passed a fairly difficult voter competency test that 85% of adults had failed in when given? Let's assume they could study for the test all they want, take it once a day like their driver's permit test, and therefore had to be knowledgeable and/or at least have the dedication to keep studying and trying again and again until they passed. There could even be an additional restriction that they have had a job at some point. When they turn 18, they can simply vote.

I'd have to be solidly imposed on ever making the right to vote contingent on passing any kind of “competency test”. No matter how good the intent, you know that any such test will eventually be abuse, in the manner that “literacy tests” were abused in the past, to selectively deny voting rights in order to skew the results of the election.

As far as voting age, I see no benefit in lowering it to include people who do not yet have any real-life experience. If anything, I'd rather see it raised, so that voters are more likely to have had the experience of holding down a job, trying to support themselves and possibly a family, and having to bear the burden of taxes and regulations imposed by government. Young people, who do not yet have this experience, I think would be more likely to vote out of idealism for policies that are harmful to those of us who have to try to make a living in The Real World.

I agree about the tests. Voting rights should never be contingent on a test.

In terms of age, 18 is good. That’s the age you can enlist. It would be wrong if some one were old enough to go to war but not old enough vote on those who would send him to war,

I was 17 when I enlisted and because of my birthday, I could not vote in any state or national election until I was almost 20. Then I made it by less than 2 weeks.

 

[Coyote]

Would you be in favor of letting 16 year olds being allowed to vote if they passed a fairly difficult voter competency test that 85% of adults had failed in when given? Let's assume they could study for the test all they want, take it once a day like their driver's permit test, and therefore had to be knowledgeable and/or at least have the dedication to keep studying and trying again and again until they passed. There could even be an additional restriction that they have had a job at some point. When they turn 18, they can simply vote.

I'd have to be solidly imposed on ever making the right to vote contingent on passing any kind of “competency test”. No matter how good the intent, you know that any such test will eventually be abuse, in the manner that “literacy tests” were abused in the past, to selectively deny voting rights in order to skew the results of the election.

As far as voting age, I see no benefit in lowering it to include people who do not yet have any real-life experience. If anything, I'd rather see it raised, so that voters are more likely to have had the experience of holding down a job, trying to support themselves and possibly a family, and having to bear the burden of taxes and regulations imposed by government. Young people, who do not yet have this experience, I think would be more likely to vote out of idealism for policies that are harmful to those of us who have to try to make a living in The Real World.

I agree about the tests. Voting rights should never be contingent on a test.

In terms of age, 18 is good. That’s the age you can enlist. It would be wrong if some one were old enough to go to war but not old enough vote on those who would send him to war,

I was 17 when I enlisted and because of my birthday, I could not vote in any state or national election until I was almost 20. Then I made it by less than 2 weeks.

That isn’t right imo...

 

[ptbw forever]

Some here have forgotten you are in the CDZ. That means no insulting or flaming members. It also means you need to stay on topic. For the uninformed, that topic is lowering the voting age.

Then delete Crepitus' stupid ass post about right wingers taking a "fake news" test and do your fucking job for once.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Would you be in favor of letting 16 year olds being allowed to vote if they passed a fairly difficult voter competency test that 85% of adults had failed in when given? Let's assume they could study for the test all they want, take it once a day like their driver's permit test, and therefore had to be knowledgeable and/or at least have the dedication to keep studying and trying again and again until they passed. There could even be an additional restriction that they have had a job at some point. When they turn 18, they can simply vote.

I'd have to be solidly imposed on ever making the right to vote contingent on passing any kind of “competency test”. No matter how good the intent, you know that any such test will eventually be abuse, in the manner that “literacy tests” were abused in the past, to selectively deny voting rights in order to skew the results of the election.

As far as voting age, I see no benefit in lowering it to include people who do not yet have any real-life experience. If anything, I'd rather see it raised, so that voters are more likely to have had the experience of holding down a job, trying to support themselves and possibly a family, and having to bear the burden of taxes and regulations imposed by government. Young people, who do not yet have this experience, I think would be more likely to vote out of idealism for policies that are harmful to those of us who have to try to make a living in The Real World.

I agree about the tests. Voting rights should never be contingent on a test.

In terms of age, 18 is good. That’s the age you can enlist. It would be wrong if some one were old enough to go to war but not old enough vote on those who would send him to war,

I was 17 when I enlisted and because of my birthday, I could not vote in any state or national election until I was almost 20. Then I made it by less than 2 weeks.

That isn’t right imo...

You think that is bad, you should hear my story about my escapades with the drinking age in the late 70s early 80s!

 

[Papageorgio]

A majority of the millenniums can't even name the Fifty states.

Wait! There are FIFTY states now? When did that happen?!

Yes, we are now down to 50 states.

I think 7 of them must have seceded from the union under Obama.

No they folded under his economy. So they need to keep the voting age where it presently sits.

 

[boedicca]

No. 16 year olds voting is a terrible idea.

I'll note the hypocrisy of the Left thinking that voter ID laws are somehow racist while supporting Voting Tests for 16 year olds. Are they going to charge the white 16 year olds a poll tax as well?

Then again, with the government spending all the money for future generations without their consent, should toddlers be allowed to vote?

Even better, should parents with a kid get to vote twice?

What about trannies who can't bear children. Can then vote for the children they believe they should have?

 

[hjmick]

I propose we make republicans take a very simple to vote.

A very simple what? You can't even write a simple sentence and you want to make others do... something... in order to vote?

 

[2aguy]

Would you be in favor of letting 16 year olds being allowed to vote if they passed a fairly difficult voter competency test that 85% of adults had failed in when given? Let's assume they could study for the test all they want, take it once a day like their driver's permit test, and therefore had to be knowledgeable and/or at least have the dedication to keep studying and trying again and again until they passed. There could even be an additional restriction that they have had a job at some point. When they turn 18, they can simply vote.

Any test for the Right to vote would be unConstitutional. The democrats already tried using a reading test to keep Blacks from voting and they lost on it......

 

[Dekster]

I am fine with 16 year olds voting. I think, however, the DNC would be shocked to discover how conservative many of them can be.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The age of majority is the age of majority

So if you want to give 16 year olds the the right to be adults then they can vote.

 

[jwoodie]

Would you be in favor of letting 16 year olds being allowed to vote if they passed a fairly difficult voter competency test that 85% of adults had failed in when given? Let's assume they could study for the test all they want, take it once a day like their driver's permit test, and therefore had to be knowledgeable and/or at least have the dedication to keep studying and trying again and again until they passed. There could even be an additional restriction that they have had a job at some point. When they turn 18, they can simply vote.

No, and the voting age should be restored to 21, the age of majority. Why should children, who are not legally competent to sign a contract, be given the right to vote?