Sanders wins: Ohio judge rules 17-year-olds can vote on election day

To me this wreaks of desperation from the Sanders camp. AT 17 I had more interesting things to do than pay attention to American politics. But the bigger question should be asked. This close to the election cycle should things like this be happening ?

I don't think so.

Sen. Bernie Sanders notched a potentially significant win on Friday evening when an Ohio judge issued an order, allowing 17-year-old voters to participate in the state's presidential primary on Tuesday.

How low can Sanders go?

This is what Sanders attorney says:

"This is a huge victory for 17-year-olds across Ohio. Their votes for presidential nominees will now count when they vote on either Tuesday or over the weekend in early voting," Deutch said in a statement.

So a seventeen year old can't be trusted to buy a gun. They can't be trusted to buy a pack of smokes. They can't be trusted to buy a bottle of beer.

But their 'adult' enough to vote!

"This last-minute legislating from the bench on election law has to stop," he said, according to The Associated Press. "Our system cannot give one county court the power to change 30 years of election law for the entire state of Ohio, 23 days into early voting and only four days before an election."

I agree with Husted.

Kali educated me

so I went back to edit out my original..

a reply to: neo96

It's their future they are voting for, so why not?

I'm much more worried about old people voting because they don't give a damn about the future of a teens life. They only care whether or not their candidate represents their outdated thinking.

This is a step forward in my opinion. Let more people vote who's lives will actually be impacted the most going into college , careers and such.

Also if the post below me is true, this is par for the course, not some crazy exception.

a reply to: neo96

Nearly every state in the US allows 17 year old people to vote in primaries if they will be 18 on election day. Ohio did until recently, Bernie just got it changed back.

a reply to: neo96

Did he stop to think that some might vote for other candidates,

a reply to: Stormdancer777

As far as the Democrats go, Hillary does not have much popularity with younger crowds. Some females think they're sticking it to us men by voting in that broad, but that's all she might gain. A few mislead girls thinking she's a role model for some reason.

a reply to: Stormdancer777

And they might, so what is all the hoopla about?
It isn't that they can only vote if they vote for Bernie. Makes sense, if you are going to of age on election day then why not?

a reply to: deadlyhope

It's their future they are voting for, so why not?

Just what the hell do they have to be concerned about.

Most still living under mommy and daddies roofs.

Most are going to college thanks to the student loan debt that accounts for over 1 trillion dollars in DEBT.

And thanks to the ACA they don't have any health insurance concerns since they are covered until the age of 25.

I would love to see how many 17 year olds vote for Trump or Kasich in Ohio.

I wonder if we will ever see the real totals.

a reply to: neo96

So they shouldn't be worried about the world they will face in just a few years?

That's assuming their parents can afford obamacare or are covered by their employer.

I wish I had known more about politics at much younger than 17. It could be argued that many of our problems come from lack or education and involvement of younger people. They grow up complacent, uneducated, uninvolved.

a reply to: neo96

Who are you to say if they should have a voice or not... It is their right to vote, pretty ironic you are here trying to deny that.
Sounds like a lot of judging and assuming in this post about these kids, kids you know nothing about. It is their future, just like the rest of us.

Pretty sure you could stay on your parents insurance till 25 before the ACA btw, could be wrong tho.

a reply to: deadlyhope

Real life is a snip.

They might as get used to it now, and learn what the rest of us have learned.

People don't get everything their little hearts desire.

It's called the REAL world, and not sheltered existence, because Sanders told them their were 'special'.

a reply to: Sremmos80

Pretty sure you could stay on your parents insurance till 25 before the ACA btw, could be wrong tho.

Funny how I had insurance bagging groceries at $3.25 an hour. at age 18.

I love it when Sanders supporters say how 'bad' things are today.

What they NEED to start doing is start taking a good,long, hard look at what they do have instead of snipping about what they don't.

a reply to: neo96

They might as get used to it now, and learn what the rest of us have learned. People don't get everything their little hearts desire.

What does this have to do with anything? Sounds like you just want to rant about 17 year old kids and just using this as your proxy...

Again highly ironic you are here criticizing someone getting people to be able to exercise their rights.

I love it when Sanders supporters say how 'bad' things are today.

Ya just more ranting about nothing to do with the topic you created...

What year was that btw that you were working? Also was it back when most grocery positions were union?

a reply to: neo96

When did I bring up Sanders?

If kids decades ago were taught about capitalism and purchasing power and about different politics more in depth and such, we wouldn't have many of the problems we have today.

Educated and involved youth is very important, in my opinion. Teaching them from a young age that life and liberty and upheld here in the United states, and they they even have a chance to be involved...

Or we could shun the youth, make sure they are never educated, never involved and watch our nation fall.

a reply to: Stormdancer777

It doesn't matter, he's always been about making voting more accessible rather than less.

originally posted by: xuenchen
I would love to see how many 17 year olds vote for Trump or Kasich in Ohio.

I wonder if we will ever see the real totals.

I'm thinking Kasich has the edge solely base on intimidation only?

a reply to: Sremmos80

What does this have to do with anything? S

Because someone brought up things like this.

Pretty sure you could stay on your parents insurance till 25 before the ACA btw, could be wrong tho.

What year was that btw that you were working?

Wasn't union. It' was back in the 86 where $3.25 has today's value of $ 7 bucks an hour.

Inflation is a snip too.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Stormdancer777

It doesn't matter, he's always been about making voting more accessible rather than less.

Except when he whines about citizens united.

Which is the only reason people are giving him money at ALL.

The principles articulated by the Supreme Court in the case have also been extended to for-profit corporations, labor unions and other associations. By allowing unlimited election spending by individuals and corporations, the decision has "re-shaped the political landscape" of the United States.[2][3

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: seeker1963

Obviously a plant, that is just way to convenient.