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

a reply to: Swills

Funny how it's a guy in Vermont suing a state he doesn't live in.

If people were so 'upset' why didn't they do it on their own?

That's the actions of a NEOCON trying to get 'his' way over the residents of said state.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

That's cheating and we all know it.

Anyone already eighteen should be able to vote in the primaries.

If that is so acceptable then anyone gets to buy a handgun at 20 because they are turning 21.

Never mind, Neo.

I am not going to waste my time with false equivalencies and red herrings.

a reply to: introvert


Yeah that was a 'false' equivalency!!!

Not.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

That's cheating and we all know it.

Anyone already eighteen should be able to vote in the primaries.

If that is so acceptable then anyone gets to buy a handgun at 20 because they are turning 21.

That makes no sense at all...maybe if you were 20 and paid for the gun, but couldn't pick it up and physically own it until you were 21 might make some sort of sense, but again, owning a gun and voting for your future are kinda different in my opinion

Being 18, I personally know that 17 is not an age where one should be eligible to vote. Heck I think that even the age of 18 isn't. The main problem is that at that age, one doesn't really fully understand how taxes work, how the economy works, how the world moves/works, etc.

So their vote is going to be a blind vote. They're just going to choose whoever says the right things, without giving much though to it, and whoever their friends and social media thinks is cool/a good person.
Interview the majority of people 18 and younger and ask them if they like Donald Trump. 99% will answer that they hate him and the main reason would be because of what they saw on social media (not that I support Trump).

Most people below the age of 20 haven't gone through as much responsibility in life to know how much these elections affect them and why certain things are good & bad. I know this even from myself. I'm 18 and don't even pay much attention to any of this and my general knowledge of a candidate is what they've so far been saying in their campaigns. I barely know any of their history and such.

But one thing I do know is that this is pointless either way since the electoral college is what actually votes for a president.

originally posted by: neomaximus10

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

That's cheating and we all know it.

Anyone already eighteen should be able to vote in the primaries.

If that is so acceptable then anyone gets to buy a handgun at 20 because they are turning 21.

That makes no sense at all...maybe if you were 20 and paid for the gun, but couldn't pick it up and physically own it until you were 21 might make some sort of sense, but again, owning a gun and voting for your future are kinda different in my opinion

It makes sense some people just refuse to see it.

Both are constitutional RIGHTS.

Both have limitations placed on them that have been deemed acceptable.

The vote is the most dangerous RIGHT we have.

Everyone knows it. Though some will refuse to admit it.

See 8 years of Bush. 8 years of Obama, and the bloody corpses behind them.

originally posted by: neo96
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.

^ this

a reply to: neo96

You do not have a constitutional right to participate in the electoral processes of a private political party.

The GOP/DNC are private entities and can/do create their own rules.

The general election is a different story.

originally posted by: Aazadan
It's the job of adults to make sure the next generation has an easier time. A complete failure on your part.

That's just snowflake talk. Life isn't easy. My son will realize that. I will work to make sure he has the tools needed to deal with the world, but I will not make things easier for him. He will then be able to out-compete snowflakes.

Then I will have succeeded.

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Aazadan

Yeah bagging groceries requires a phd!

LOL.

Just wait until everyone gets a free education!

Imagine the horrors of being in charge of hiring people then?

Word of advice to future college graduates! Stay the hell away from "Human Resources"! Is it just me or does that name alone make a free thinker shudder?

It didn't used to, then my company went a lot more corporate. Now we can't sneeze without asking HR which type of tissue to use...

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: seeker1963

These days a world of educated people is somehow a horrible thing.

This anti-intellectual push in America is disturbing. In today's America it is now "cool" and "fashionable" to be ignorant and proud of it.

The idea of what is considered an 'intellectual' these days is what is frightening. Critical Thinking and Logic have been replaced by Feels Good and Emotion.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

he idea of what is considered an 'intellectual' these days is what is frightening.

You can say that again, and twice on Sundays.

And will never be wrong.

a reply to: neo96

What's with you guys and voter suppression, I'm sure if they commented serious crimes they will be tried as adults, they can join the military as early as 16 providing mommy and daddy signed a weaver,they can get married and run a business, drive a car..now will your average 17yrs old go out and vote??..perhaps not..

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: neo96

What's with you guys and voter suppression, I'm sure if they commented serious crimes they will be tried as adults, they can join the military as early as 16 providing mommy and daddy signed a weaver,they can get married and run a business, drive a car..now will your average 17yrs old go out and vote??..perhaps not..

I'm sorry. I missed where any 17-year-old of any ethnicity was ever considered eligible to vote for anything in this country.

Please explain to me how this can be considered suppression. Next, you'll be telling us that we should lower the voting age to 5.

It's crazy. We can't let people smoke or drink before 21. We don't even think they are competent to carry their own health insurance until they are 26 ... but good lord! They MUST be able to vote at 17.

And heck, while we're at it, we better point out that it is especially detrimental to blacks and latinos. Who cares if whites or Asians who are 17 vote?

Really? You cannot be making this argument.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Swills

Is it any wonder you support a Republican trying to take voting rights away?

Midway through the primaries!
Better than a democrat trying to take away me second amendment RIGHT.
See THIS thread:
Bernie Sanders Calls for All Guns Not Used Specifically for Hunting to be Outlawed!
Was there a point there?

...and cue the deflection and diversion modules!!

Same people mad about this are the same idiots who think a 5 yr old should be able to use a gun. SMH

originally posted by: Kuroodo
Being 18, I personally know that 17 is not an age where one should be eligible to vote. Heck I think that even the age of 18 isn't. The main problem is that at that age, one doesn't really fully understand how taxes work, how the economy works, how the world moves/works, etc.

So their vote is going to be a blind vote. They're just going to choose whoever says the right things, without giving much though to it, and whoever their friends and social media thinks is cool/a good person.

Age doesn't change these things.

a reply to: neo96

It is shady making the change now, but realistically, anyone who is going to be able to vote in the actual election should be allowed to vote in primaries. Though to take that further, each party should probably decide on their own. Primaries are essentially just non-binding opinion polls for the parties to decide which candidate to run in the election.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: neo96

What's with you guys and voter suppression, I'm sure if they commented serious crimes they will be tried as adults, they can join the military as early as 16 providing mommy and daddy signed a weaver,they can get married and run a business, drive a car..now will your average 17yrs old go out and vote??..perhaps not..

I'm sorry. I missed where any 17-year-old of any ethnicity was ever considered eligible to vote for anything in this country.

Please explain to me how this can be considered suppression. Next, you'll be telling us that we should lower the voting age to 5.

It's crazy. We can't let people smoke or drink before 21. We don't even think they are competent to carry their own health insurance until they are 26 ... but good lord! They MUST be able to vote at 17.

And heck, while we're at it, we better point out that it is especially detrimental to blacks and latinos. Who cares if whites or Asians who are 17 vote?

Really? You cannot be making this argument.

Wasn't making a case for ethnic voting suppression, matter of fact I think fewer young Blks/latinos are even less likely to vote than their white counterparts, but given that they can be held responsible and carry out responsibilities accorded to 18 and over, whats the harm in expanding the franchise, or do you think if they did vote they will just wreck the system.