by Tina
California Assemblyman Evan Lo,( D-Campbel) has proposed lowering the voting age in California to seventeen. Once again the left thinks it must rely on tricks and slight of hand to win elections. In some ways it seems a strange idea for a state party that wields absolute control and guarantees backing for any Democrat running for the presidency.
Are they hearing footsteps behind them?
If desperate acts can be seen as acts of fear and desperation then the actions of the Dem party over the last year are a clear indication they hear footsteps. The reception Republican leaders got at recent town hall events in California were packed with angry voters. . It’s likely true that the people that voted for these lawmakers and put Trump in the White House were not among the angry protesters. Why would they be angry when their concerns are being pursued? And it’s also no secret that the Democrats vowed to pursue and angry voter community organized town hall protest to stop Trump:
Many of the local groups flooding these town halls are using the Indivisible guide, created by a group of former Democratic congressional staffers to show how to effectively influence members of Congress. Angel Padilla, one of the former staffers leading the group, said that unlike the Tea Party movement in 2009, which caught many Democrats unaware, Republicans went into this week prepared to face angry constituents.
The radical controlling power in the Democrat Party have realized, whether acknowledged publically or not, that they are indeed looking at a bleak future. They have enjoyed great advantage to influence the young in our educational system, including college, but they are being challenged as never before in this area. In addition, they do not have a strong bench filled with up and coming stars in the party. Instead they are witnessing a large group of young conservatives with strong convictions out in force to inform and educate. These younger generation Republicans, Libertarians, and Independents share a dedication to the Constitution and the founding principles of our nation. These are people that work in politics but also within the fields of education, the law, science, business, and journalism. They are committed to the concepts of individual rights, sound science based in the scientific method, economic growth and prosperity, integrity in journalism, and peace through strength. (Many of them have been denied free speech rights)
I see this proposal as a desperate act. It follows the left’s fall back pattern of buying votes. They always have a carrot to throw out…special consideration policy for people of color or invented gender groups…taking money from bad corporations and banks and promising to give it to these groups …offering free college or forgiveness of college loans…or…lowering the voting age. In normal circles this is considered bribery. They engage in bribery tactics because they don’t have ideas that can be supported or defended without tricks, lies, and deception.
Will California Democrats succeed in lowering the voting age to seventeen? It wouldn’t surprise me at all.
Would it be wise to lower the voting age to seventeen? In my estimation there is no sound reason to give voting rights to seventeen-year-olds. In fact, except for the fact that we ask young men and women to fight and die for our nation, I think twenty-one was an age that made more sense. How about you?
Voting is a privilege, not an absolute.
With few exceptions, today’s 17-year-olds have the mental ability for reason that a kindergartener has and have difficulty chewing gum and walking at the same time.
Better to require 2 years of public service (military, peace corps, etc) as a requirement to vote at ANY age!
Great observation and a good suggestion, J.
I wonder if it would be constitutional.
Should the rest of us be grandfathered?
Our 17 year old’s do not have the maturity to cast an intelligent vote. But, arguably neither do many of our 40 year old’s. The difference is in their social perspective and that would mean a lot more “feel good” legislation that the nation can’t afford. Teens don’t have the advantage of hindsight and that is a one big advantage!
Coming from a Trump voter, I would have to call that “rich”. The chief notion behind having the youngsters vote young is … just … getting them into the habit.
After the last election, any claims to “maturity” among the electorate, I would have to call bogus. The last election might best be characterized as a national hissy-fit.
If I were the type of person to suggest a test before voting (I’m not), I would propose but one question:
Do you believe your microwave is spying on you?
Respondents who answered “yes” would be declared mentally unfit to vote.
This would preclude Kellyanne Conway and anyone who takes her seriously from voting.
But I think that would set a dangerous precedent.
Sore loser whine?
I agree J. Every able bodied citizen, both men and women should serve their country. Our borders need protecting and our vets, homeless and the elderly in their own country need more help than they are getting.
While we’re at it why not do what Roosevelt did with the WPA program, by putting welfare recipients to work of fixing our roads and working in our VA hospitals? Just think of the real education young people would get working with our vets. It would undo much of the brainwashing they received from their biased liberal teachers.
It’s all constitutional. Just needs the approval of Congress and the president’s signature.
“1. Congress and the President Authorize a Draft
A crisis occurs which requires more troops than the volunteer military can supply. Congress passes and the president signs legislation which starts a draft. It should be noted that the president cannot initiate a draft on his own. Congress would first have to pass legislation (both the House and Senate), and the president would have to sign the bill into law.
https://www.thebalance.com/what-happens-during-a-draft-3345235
Works for me. I had the honor to get to know the late Phillip Rose. He was a B-24 command pilot in England during WWII. After completing his combat tour, He came home to Chico on leave. When he went to get a driver’s license, his mother had to go with him because he was not yet 25.
There was a time when we required someone the acquire some maturity and judgment before being allowed to take on responsibility. We are living in the age of information. We are drowning in rivers of information. We are starving for wisdom.
Here, here!
I say let the 17 yr olds speak and make their case. many are more awake than you think and some only months from being 18.
Let them speak, I remain open and undecided.
And Voting should not be considered a Privilege. That is absurd. Only for the chosen few?
Taxation without representation?
Old people dictation of your first adult years? Old people created this mess.
Being “awake” does not necessarily translate to being “aware” or able to make a decision based on facts – as we’ve seen with the snowflakes being led to screaming and waving signs without a thought to the subject they’re protesting.
The word “priviledge” had Dewey flummoxed in this age of PC culture.