General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow do people feel about allowing sixteen-year-old teenagers to vote?
The issue is on the ballot in San Francisco. If approved, it would limit 16 and 17-year-old voting to municipal elections. I've always supported child suffrage and I believe this could be a starting point. Opinions?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/16/san-francisco-could-allow-16-year-olds-to-vote-the-rest-of-the-country-should-follow
brush
(53,743 posts)And most are usually conservative because of that as they've not matured enough to form their own opinions.
No.
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)They would simply vote the way their husbands told them to?
brush
(53,743 posts)did that behind the voting booth curtain?
With kids, they haven't develop critical thinking skills yet at that stage, don't know their own minds, so most will just vote for who or what they hear their parents talking about.
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)That our minds were too simple and unable to understand politics. I don't think it hyperbolic at all.
brush
(53,743 posts)You think women believed that shit? If they did women still wouldn't be voting. That's not the case because women fought against it.
Crunchy Frog
(26,578 posts)and it doesn't mean that the same argument concerning minors is invalid.
If you're going to make an argument for child suffrage, then make it based on actual evidence and not based on a different situation that is not at all comparable.
JI7
(89,241 posts)who were the same age as the men who could vote is just silly .
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)What kind of evidence would you have me provide? Allowing 16-year-olds to vote in municipal elections would give us empirical data and you are opposed to the idea.
JI7
(89,241 posts)the right to vote then.
Crunchy Frog
(26,578 posts)but that doesn't mean that it actually was.
People knew that there had been a number of highly competent and successful female monarchs over the past several centuries. By 1920, many women had been getting higher educations, advanced degrees, and entering professional careers for many decades. Women had been heavily involved in political activism for decades, including very prominent roles in the abolishionist movement, and a decades long struggle for their own rights and suffrage.
These were objective facts, and they could not be denied, even by people who wanted to pretend that they thought that women didn't have the mental faculties to vote.
The final nail in the coffin of that view was the role that women played in keeping society functioning during WWI.
What evidence do you have for 16 year olds having the level of brain maturation, experience and judgment that I just showed you were very much present for women at the time they won the right to vote?
Do you also think that they should be able to serve in the military, be subject to the draft, be free to sign contracts and have sex with adults, and and always be treated as adults in matters of criminal justice? I don't.
I do think that politically engaged minors should be politically active. There are many, many things that they can do to help with campaigns or causes that they support, even without voting.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)That argument may have been applied to women, but it was BS since adult women had the same critical thinking skills of adult men.
16-year-olds do NOT have the same critical thinking skills as adults. They are still in many respects children.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)Oh ffs.
trueblue2007
(17,194 posts)Ms. Toad
(33,999 posts)Minors who will turn 18 by the presidential election are permitted to vote in the primary (regardless of age). That means individuals who are 17 years and 3 months old can vote in the Iowa caucuses. To allow 16 year olds to vote is shifting the age a mere 3 months nd 1 day earlier.
That said, I don't know for sure how I feel about continuing to reach down. At 12 I would have been a competent voter. (My votes would largely - but not entirely - have been the same as my parents. The same as now.) In contrast, my daughter (age 30) and my spouse (age 68) vote as I tell them to vote - although my daughter is moving closer to an independent vote at least as to the president.
So age is not necessary a determining factor as to independence and critical thought.
Mme. Defarge
(8,014 posts)Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)greenjar_01
(6,477 posts)you can be tried as an adult for a crime in that state.
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)Thanks.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,816 posts)Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)Something tells me that if we had 13- to-17 year-olds voting we wouldn't have children in cages.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,816 posts)vote the least. That won't change just by lowering the voting age two or even five years. All you'd achieve is a lot of weird pandering to kids.
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)They certainly know how to call-out bullshit when they see it and they are the first to point-out inequality and lack of fairness.
greenjar_01
(6,477 posts)And weird pandering to kids? Good lord, the weird pandering to geriatric racists is enough to make me wish for some kid-centric advertising!
greenjar_01
(6,477 posts)apply to voting as well.
Crunchy Frog
(26,578 posts)be tried as an adult in that state.
greenjar_01
(6,477 posts)people of that age have adult decision-making capacities or potentials. I get that it's a case-by-case basis following some review for trying as an adult (though of course, in practice it mostly just applies if the crime is "heinous" enough and "in the media," or the DA or deciding judge is up for reelection or whatever), whereas voting would have to be a blanket age decision. Nevertheless, the underlying theory is that young people can make adult decisions; they should have the franchise in that case.
JI7
(89,241 posts)Waste of time issue .
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)A large percentage of people over 18 don't vote either.
JI7
(89,241 posts)Everyone else waited , they can wait also.
Another thing is that at that young age it would be easy for parents, especially right wing types who are more likely to do this to take control of their votes.
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)JI7
(89,241 posts)the Duggar Dad getting over 20 votes .
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)I doubt any of the Duggar adult children are more enlightened than their 16-year-old siblings.
JI7
(89,241 posts)school and dress more normal .
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)Remember, a lot of 16 - 17 year-olds are rebellious and may vote with more independence as a way to express their individuality.
I think they are to young. Yes, there are some 16 year olds who are more mature but then that leaves the rest of them. I was a teenager once and I sure as hell would not have wanted me or my friends voting at the time much less any other of the teenagers.
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)Aren't there a lot of uninformed and immature people over 18 who vote? I was extremely engaged politically at 16. I was a progressive while both my parents were Republicans. I belonged to the Civics Club in high school, went to feminist meetings, and actively worked for school integration through busing. This was in Memphis in the 70s.
Doreen
(11,686 posts)Yes, there still are immature people older than 18 out there voting. We just do not need to make that list bigger any sooner than it needs to be. I really do think that the 2 years between 16 to 18 makes a difference for most people when it comes to maturity. I am glad there are teenagers who take it upon themselves to become involved as much as possible like you did but most do not.
Poiuyt
(18,117 posts)I was a bright young lad at 16, but I knew nothing about the real world. I barely knew who the president was, who our mayor was, much less the issues of the day. I don't feel the great majority of 16 year old students would be able to grasp the complexities of civics and social studies. Most students that age are only interested in the opposite sex.
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)I don't think so and I think our current President reflects that ignorance.
Poiuyt
(18,117 posts)Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)Demsrule86
(68,469 posts)Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)radical noodle
(7,997 posts)I would vote no.
littlemissmartypants
(22,590 posts)Childism should be against the law and maybe if we had more kids invested in the running of this country we'd be more evolved than we are now.
The kids already have mock elections in Elementary school where they have debates, research the candidates and on voting day go behind the curtain to make their deeply deliberated decision. I was amazed and proud at the seriousness my kiddo exhibited on that day which she considered a very big deal.
I am an unmitigated, absolute, big Y-E-S in favor of this!
❤ lmsp
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)When I first thought about this issue, years ago, I was absolutely against it. Eventually, though, the more I thought about it the more I realize that the arguments against child suffrage were the exact same arguments used against Blacks and women and I gradually changed my mind. Allowing teenagers to vote in municipal elections would be a great way to test the waters. I think it's a wonderful idea.
littlemissmartypants
(22,590 posts)Sympthsical
(9,041 posts)Age, knowledge, and experience very much come into play when regarding these things.
Teenagers are not known for having amazing judgement. There's a reason for that - most of them do not have amazing judgement.
It's like age of consent. Some teenagers are more mature than others, sure. But a line must be drawn somewhere. So we draw that line. Similar with voting. I think at least the opportunity for a full high school education should be the bare minimum there.
Intelligent or not, knowledgeable or not, it's a line that almost all Americans have in common. An opportunity at being fully educated through high school.
Why we want even more uninformed people with a lack of judgement voting is beyond me. We have quite enough already.
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)Who reads everything she can get her hands on regarding current affairs, history, etc. would not be eligible to vote?
Sympthsical
(9,041 posts)And I said opportunity. A drop out still has the opportunity.
Weve decided 18 years is the line to adulthood. You say, why not lower it two years? I dont know, why not four? Why not six?
All of our age lines are arbitrary.
We have plenty of psychological and physiological evidence about intelligence and judgement that show the younger you go, the less formed the brain is.
You havent really given any good evidence that more uninformed voting is a good thing. Why do you want more uninformed voters with less judgement? Whats the net benefit there? Just because, isnt much of an answer.
You keep positing exceptions. There are always exceptions. But I havent heard any evidence whatsoever that making a general rule for 16 years old is sound.
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)You said yourself it's all arbitrary. All your reasons not to allow are just as subjective as mine.
JI7
(89,241 posts)Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)JI7
(89,241 posts)Withywindle
(9,988 posts)If they have the same right to privacy in the voting booth as anyone else, which they should, I think a lot of kids would NOT vote the same as their parents.
Imagine if some of the Duggar kids were LGBT and closeted for obvious reasons. There are lots of kids like that, in similar situations. Imagine kids with deeply racist parents, who know better because of their friends.
Of course this could go both ways. We could have kids voting right wing to spite their liberal parents.
SharonClark
(10,014 posts)others offered.
If youre so for child suffrage, why did you suggest 16 and not 12 or 10?
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)In California. I wanted opinions. I've been interested in this subject for many years and like to hear what people think. I honestly think it will happen in the future, although not in my lifetime.
GReedDiamond
(5,310 posts)Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)Oddly, the movie reminds me of what is happening now, except instead of rounding up adults over 30 for concentration camps, we are rounding up immigrants. I need to review the movie to refresh my memory, but wasn't it about a populist politician using a pop idol to facilitate fascism? Hmmmm.
Response to Laffy Kat (Reply #51)
GReedDiamond This message was self-deleted by its author.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,816 posts)about youth and lack of experience.
In actuality, it would hardly matter. The voting age was lowered from 21 to 18 in the unrealistic expectation that the younger voters would turn out in droves. Didn't happen. Probably only a tiny percentage of eligible 16 and 17 year olds would vote. Especially in municipal elections. Heck, their elders barely turn out for those.
If schools did a good job of teaching critical thinking, maybe there'd be a strong argument for 16 year olds to vote. In reality, history is barely taught and critical thinking not at all.
AmyStrange
(7,989 posts)JonLP24
(29,322 posts)It wasn't that long ago but I would not like to be a child today growing up under Trump and Coronavirus. All the arguments against 16 year olds don't hold water when you compare them to Trump voters. The younger generation is even more progressive than us millenials.
AmyStrange
(7,989 posts)-
Under their parent's influence my ass.
I wanted to get away from my parents at 16 and 17. It's why I joined the Air Force.
==========
SharonClark
(10,014 posts)should be raised to 23.
AmyStrange
(7,989 posts)-
then the only people left will be democrats!
Yay!
=========
Withywindle
(9,988 posts)When people 18-23 do vote, they vote overwhelmingly in favor of Democrats. Obama won the youth vote decisively, and that was key to his big wins.
Let's not even consider disenfranchising a huge number of our base, please.
Laffy Kat
(16,373 posts)betsuni
(25,380 posts)They're in school, used to studying things. Study the issues and vote. Not hard.
The point about being influenced by parents. Sometimes true, obviously. On the other hand, I immediately think of my mother who I assumed was a liberal but had a thing about keeping her voting choices private. I was deeply shocked when she got mad at something I said about G.W. Bush and told me she always voted Republican because her Daddy did (I think he didn't like FDR and from then on only voted Republican). Come on, man.
In a way, teenagers see through adults more than any other age, know the pilots flying the plane are sleeping or drunk half the time.
Niagara
(7,565 posts)All of the no responses are the same exact responses they gave in 1939 when they discussed lowering voting age from 21 to 18. The voting age didn't get lowered to 18 until 1971.
Our percentage of younger voter's turnout is already a low number. Perhaps if we taught them more about civics and political science and had them engage with civic duties, maybe we could save and continue our democracy.
Not all 16 year olds are the same on the maturity scale. Not all of them are out getting intoxicated and involved with cow tipping on Friday night. Many have had to deal with balancing work and school, earning money to pay for a car and car insurance, preparing for college, perhaps choosing a reliable birth control method and already had a pregnancy scare at some point. Believe it or not, political policies can have consequences for 16 year olds as well.
In Austria and Cuba the voting age is 16. Australia and Italy are discussing the subject but I don't believe it's been determined yet.
electric_blue68
(14,818 posts)who got to vote at 18 in '71!
I was both excited, and a little miffed because it was a pretty off year election. I'd already done polititical volunteering by '68 at 15.
I've hardly ever missed a primary, and only one municipal maaaybe along a concurrent congressional general election.
Maybe 16 if municipal only. Sort of getting your feet wet. Then 17 could local add State. Then at 18 would be as is - full voting privileges.
Withywindle
(9,988 posts)I like the way the law restricts it to municipal elections. That would mean that the kids who vote would be the ones most educated on local politics, not just being swayed by the celebrity show of Presidential elections.
One thing would be very important - that kids have the same absolute right to privacy in the voting booth as adults. Their parents (or anyone else) should NOT be allowed to see their votes or control it in anyway. Not all kids will vote the same as their parents and that needs to be OK.
Think, for example, about LGBTQ kids trapped in very homophobic fundie families. They could vote in their own self-interest without opening themselves to rejection or abuse.
marlakay
(11,427 posts)Would be more mature or parents pushing them.
At 16 me and my dad in the early 70's had arguments about pot vs booze. I would have voted back then to legalize even thought my parents wouldn't, same with gay issues. My parents were dems but more moderate.
I wasn't up on all stuff but I watched a lot of the watergate stuff with my dad and definitely had a opinion about Vietnam. I would have wanted national vote note not just local.
Iggo
(47,535 posts)dawg day
(7,947 posts)that are enacted now.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)radius777
(3,635 posts)force them to vote GOP. IOW, kids that young won't be able to resist and would be coerced into voting how domineering adults wanted. There is a huge difference between a 16yo and an 18yo in terms of self-awareness and independence.
The comparison to women is not valid, as women are adults who were unjustly treated as children - whereas children actually are children.
Celerity
(43,124 posts)Laughable to say the majority of 16 and 17 year olds would vote RW, as is being inferred by some. As for level of sophistication, today a 16 or 17yo has exposure to such a broader level of thought than one did in the 50's, 60's, 70's, even the 1980's, due to the internet and its information sharing.
Also, people assuming that 16, and 17 years are mindless automatons who will bow and scrape to their parents wish and command have been removed from teens for too long.
I see people talking about RWers with 10 kids tossing them into the voting booth are using disengenous framing, as it is only 2 years, so unless they had two sets of quintuplets in a 2 year period, this is a vast overstatement of impact in a given election. Even over time, we are talking about such a small subset of families who spit out that many children.
I am far more worried and concerned about senior citizens, who as a group historically cast more votes for the Rethug than the Dem with Trump, Romney, McCain, Bush twice, plus also favoured Bush the elder and Reagan overall.
All that said, this thread doe not surprise me, as DU skews so old compared to the general population and since I have been here I have learned to live with youth-hostile undercurrents from some quarters.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Let them vote in school elections... that's a good start. Teach more civics.
Sixteen and 17 year olds are gullible and will believe any lie that's told to them. Free-this, free-that. Efforts to appeal to this high-risk/low-voting demographic will end up turning-off and chasing-away more reliable voters. For LESS effort (and promises) trying to persuade juveniles to vote, our party could get TEN TIMES as many adult voters.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)they should be tried as adults at 16. Theyre children. I have a 16yr old; I have to remind her to put on deodorant, ffs. Shes as lefty as they come, but still lacks critical thinking skills. Shell be fine waiting a few years.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,308 posts)former9thward
(31,941 posts)If we don't trust teenagers to drink alcohol or sign contracts because we don't think they have the judgement to do those things, then they sure as hell don't have the judgement to select our leaders. Children are called children for a reason. We don't call them women and men.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)I could just as easily say that we trust them enough to operate a 3,000 lbs hunk of metal on the road, we should be able to trust them to vote.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)Though you need parental consent at that age.
I always found it odd you could join the military but couldn't drink.
former9thward
(31,941 posts)And most states are moving that way. They don't have the judgement to operate cars by themselves. That why insurance costs for them are in the atmosphere.
If you think a 16 year old has the judgement or experience to vote then I don't know what to say. The 18 year old vote has been an experiment which has been a failure. Very few of them do it. When you ask why they don't vote most are truthful. They say don't have the knowledge to do it. Either that or they say it makes no difference.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)That's most the US.
If we're going to let them drive, let them vote. If the compromise is to drop it to 17, fine, drop the voting age to 17.
But you said it yourself: very few 18 year olds vote. So, what's the big deal? Those who do are likely to make informed, strong decisions that likely will end up benefiting Democrats, as most are more liberal than Gen Xers.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)Honestly when you look at our political system I don't blame people for not voting. If I'm being honest I think 2020 is the worst election of my lifetime.
Also the older conservatives that installed Trump don't seem very informed because they rely on a lot of fake news.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)Zing Zing Zingbah
(6,496 posts)provided they are 18 by the November election day. My son voted at 17 in the state and presidential primaries this year. He's turning 18 in October.
I don't personally have a problem with it.
xmas74
(29,671 posts)And if they are given time out of the school day to vote they would. Many at that age are still in civics classes, which could give them a place to discuss what's on the ballot.
Idk. Municipal voting, usually the lowest turnout, might be the place to try it. Maybe becoming accustomed to voting in municipal elections will encourage it in other elections as time goes on.