What they failed to mention is that 16 is the collective IQ of the two subjects of those articles- Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) and Nancy Pelosi (D-USSR). This proposal comes on the heels of a Harris poll that shows that a majority of Generation Z prefers socialism to capitalism. For those unaware, Generation Z includes those born in the mid-1990’s and have not known a world without the Internet which may qualify them for some classification of mental retardation since they have the attention span of approximately seven seconds. Leave aside the fact that if you threw 100 Generation Zers into a room and asked them to define socialism, you’d probably get 100 different answers. Then again, they would probably answer with some text lingo like “LOL” or search for the appropriate emoji on their smart phone.
According to that in-depth political analysis rag Axios, this is “why it matters:”
The word “socialism” does not carry the same stigma it did in the past, now that it has been resurrected by celebrity politicians like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Young people’s political views often change as they grow older, but their support for socialistic policies is a sign that the old rules of politics are changing fast.
So, Sanders and AOC are now “celebrity politicians” rock stars. Well, they certainly cover the age extremes. Sanders never held a job until he was 40 and does not know a damn thing about the working class while the other was a failed businesswoman who tended bar before visions of Karl Marx invaded her head.
In 2020, Millennials and Generation Zers are expected to be 37% of the electorate. This is a frightening thought: the top three concerns of Generation Z are mass shootings (there really aren’t that many), racial inequality (causation is debatable), and immigration and the treatment of refugees (they’re treated quite well as the 11 million illegally living here will attest).
But now comes word that those who hold these views will not only vote in 2020, but the Democrats are now proposing that those born in 2004 or before be allowed to vote. ‘Tis an even scarier thought than the Millenials and Generation Z people!
As Tlaib is on the outs causing embarrassment for the Democrats with her mouth, AOC hijacking Pelosi’s agenda, and Omar just being an anti-Semitic jerk, Ayanna Pressley and her cause- lowering the voting age- is on the rise. For Pressley, she does not have to give a rat’s butt what the rest of America thinks; she hails from a district with a 30 Democratic advantage.
This recent push to lower the voting age seems rather strange considering the nanny state totalitarians of the Left/Democratic Party seem to want to keep young people in an extended childhood. Yet, the only adult thing they believe children are prepared for is voting. One wonders why that is? (Hint: Refer to that Harris poll) On other conditions of maturity, they seem to think the opposite. Consider the following:
- Recently, states have been considering changing their laws so that the age at which a juvenile offender can be charged as an adult will be raised. Their reason: a criminal justice system that treats 16- and 17-year-old children as adults is unjust;
- Democrats introduced a bill in Congress this year which would require a person to be 21 before purchasing a semi-automatic firearm;
- Democratic state legislatures in several states are considering the age at which one can purchase tobacco or vaping products to 21 joining seven other states and countless municipalities which ban the sale of tobacco to anyone under the age of 21;
- Some states are considering raising the age at which one can get a driver’s license to 18, and of course;
- The age for purchasing alcohol in all states is 21.
The proffered reason is that anyone younger than 18 or 21 lacks the maturity to make good decisions about committing a crime, purchasing a gun, smoking or vaping, drinking a beer, or getting behind the wheel of an automobile. Yet, they are suddenly mature enough when it comes to voting. Further, children themselves seem reluctant to enter adulthood. Today, youth are putting off adulthood (i.e., maturity) benchmarks later and later- from getting a driver’s license to finding employment to getting married and even to having sex.
It is not only immaturity, it is being prone to bad decisions also. And the reason for those bad decisions is likewise obvious: a lack of experience. But does giving a 16 or 17-year-old the right to vote “give” them that experience? Are they suddenly waved over with the magical maturity wand?
There is another reason not to extend the franchise to those under 18. Simply, by and large although there may be exceptions, they simply are not productive members of society. They rarely contribute to the treasury and one can make a case they do not contribute to the public good. If elected officials feel beholden to nonproductive constituents still in high school, then they will pander the country out of existence.
Legally, nothing is stopping states from lowering the voting age. Well before Constitutional amendments granted women or 18-year-old people the right to vote, states like Wyoming and Oregon were already doing so.
By advocating lowering the voting age because they believe younger people have the requisite experience and maturity, they negate their reasoning for all those age-based laws and proposals. If you’re old enough to vote, you’re old enough to make the mature decision to drink, smoke, drive or own a gun. One can even make a case, given the logic of the Left when it comes to voting age, that statutory rape laws should be stricken from the books also.
When the voting age was lowered nationally to 18 by an amendment in response to the Vietnam War, the reasoning was understandable: if they’re old enough to carry a gun in the military, they’re old enough to vote. In this case it is: If they’re sufficiently brainwashed by the Left, as the Harris poll indicates, then they’re old enough to vote.