California Assembly just passed a bill to allow 17 year olds to vote in California (Berkeley: crime, buy)

[settled00]

Originally Posted by settled00

Yes, we do. 17 year olds are so easy to manipulate --Just like poor people who have to depend on welfare for basic essentials. They like it that way because that's the only way they can win. They've already exploited the low IQ folks (Bern Supporters), but it's a new low to try to exploit the young by this bill.

It's almost as if the dems in power got into a room to identify the most vulnerable demographic groups and how they could turn them into votes. A new low indeed.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by settled00

Yes, we do. 17 year olds are so easy to manipulate --Just like poor people who have to depend on welfare for basic essentials. They like it that way because that's the only way they can win. They've already exploited the low IQ folks (Bern Supporters), but it's a new low to try to exploit the young by this bill.

Originally Posted by settled00

It's almost as if the dems in power got into a room to identify the most vulnerable demographic groups and how they could turn them into votes. A new low indeed.

So, these comments raise a coupla questions:

1. If stupid people and 17-year-olds are so easy to manipulate, why hasn’t the GOP manipulated them?

2. Do you know what the Trump voter profile is?

TRUMP'S APPEAL TO THE COGNITIVELY CHALLENGED

New research reports Trump voters were more likely to perform poorly on a test of intellectual ability.

...research team led by Yoav Ganzach of Tel Aviv University. "These results suggest that the 2016 U.S. presidential election had less to do with party affiliation, income, or education, and more to do with basic cognitive ability."

In the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, Ganzach and his colleagues analyzed data from the American National Election Studies, which included 5,914 participants in 2012 and 4,271 in 2016.

https://psmag.com/news/trumps-appeal...ely-challenged

[TacoSoup]

Originally Posted by Des-Lab

LOL you just keep believing that. California is already effectively a one party dictatorship masqueraded as a democracy. If Newsom and the State wants this to become law, it will become law. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Whatcha gonna do about it? Who has the clout to push back and stop anything they do?

Uh, no. It would be an amendment to the state’s constitution so it would have to be voted on.

"Well, I don't think we need to limit ourselves to passing the bill by the September 13 deadline," said Romero. "We have until June 2020 to qualify the measure for the ballot because it would ultimately have to go to voters."

Changing the voting age in California is a constitutional amendment. So, even if it passes the Senate, voters still get a say on the matter.

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by jetgraphics

There was once a time when citizenship was a privilege earned by years of service and strict prerequisites. Before 1820, a citizen had to be a property owner, tax payer, militiaman, and held to a higher standard of behavior. In addition, since the age of majority and voting was 21, while militia duty was (17 or 18) through 45, a prospective citizen had three to four years of militia duty.
The reason was simple. In the revolution, it was estimated that only 3% participated, while the rest watched from the sidelines. The winners have no intention of handing over their winnings to just anyone. So all prospective citizens had to show a modicum of courage, as well as property. And if they were going to vote on the spending of public monies, ante up their share.

This is what the socialists here in the states miss when they say "Well Denmark, Finland, aka any Scandinavian country has this!" They always fail to mention the citizenship requirements of these nations and how hard it is to actually become a citizen and enjoy these entitlements that they thirst for.

Originally Posted by jetgraphics

In any case, the perversion of government into the current democratic socialist system, where people vote themselves a living, will eventually end - in collapse.

ALWAYS.

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

I have long held that no one should be granted birthright citizenship - including those born on American soil to American citizen parents. Citizenship is best earned through service to the community and nation. Military service is but one option. Birth on soil to citizen parents could grant pathway status to citizenship earned after age 18. Love your country? Value being a citizen? Prove it.

Bold words. That's not going to make you many fans on this forum.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

Bold words. That's not going to make you many fans on this forum.

I’m not about fans.

[Rkstar71]

Originally Posted by Kid Ashbury

Scientists have already decisively proven the brain is still largely developing and doesn't reach "maturity" until the age of 25.

As such, the voting age should be raised to 25.

But the dems are getting desperate to garner as many votes as possible in order to finalize their ultimate goal of making this country into one big third world slum.

Parents threatening punishments for voting a certain way.... nahw! Never happen...

[cb73]

Wouldn't this only pertain to state/local elections? I'd think that California can't change the law as it pertains to Federal elections.

Besides leaving Trump off the ballot, of course.

[StrawberrySoup]

Sorry if someone made this point before, but it seems to me that voting should be part of package that goes with adulthood.

Old enough to go in the armed forces, old enough to be drafted, old enough to drink alcohol, old enough to buy firearms, old enough to go to the state prison, old enough to be self sufficient if your parent(s) desire.

If you start picking and choosing the rights here, it's probably from some ulterior motive.

[StrawberrySoup]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

So, these comments raise a coupla questions:

1. If stupid people and 17-year-olds are so easy to manipulate, why hasn’t the GOP manipulated them?

It seems to me that the notion of being responsible for yourself doesn't play well with the 17-year-old demographic.

Of course, the younger you are, the more extreme your politics can be. It's hard to beat an African child soldier, Hitler youth, Komsomol member, or young Pol Pot follower for really putting the hurt on opponents. Be careful what you wish for if you want young people politically involved, you may get it.