Why not lower the voting age to 14?

[Anonymous]

Why can’t a 20 year old vape?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why can’t a 20 year old vape?

Why stop at 20? My body, my choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The voting age limitation should be abolished, anyone paying over $10K annually in taxes should have the right to vote regardless of age.

So poor people should not have a voice?

Correct, if you are not buying in financially why should you get and equal voice in the direction of how that tax money is spent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know about changing the age limit, but if people were required to pass a basic, and I mean BASIC intelligence/education/information test, the world would be a much, much better place. Too many imbeciles are allowed to decide the fate of all of us, esp. in the dumb states that get the same amount of representatives as the states that produce the revenue for this country.

I wouldn’t deny anyone the right to vote but I think there should be weighing of votes. A person with a high school or equivalent education, trade school, or a two year associate degree vote is weighted as 1. A person with simply a bachelors degree has their vote weighted as a 1.5. A person with a masters degree receives the equivalent of 2 votes. Those with a doctorate level education cap out at a 2.5.
In this fashion people with demonstrated intelligence are rightly rewarded in determining the government and the trajectory of society.

So you believe that somebody who chose to achieve a degree beyond high school is demonstrably more intelligent than those that did not, simply by virtue of choosing that path?
No points for trade school?

Wow.

Absolutely. All agree that we cannot have someone with lower education credentials deciding the fate of our nation. Most of them simply vote in emotional, short-term, self-interested, illogical outbursts. That’s how America got Trump.

Are you familiar with the Electoral College?

What does the EC have to do with weighing votes according to demonstrated intelligence level?

[Anonymous]

I can only speak from my own experience, my kids were fully capable to understand country's issues and where different candidates stand on them. I myself wasn't analytical or informed enough at 14 even though I was a child prodigy

[Anonymous]

Poll taxes were abolished for a reason

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know about changing the age limit, but if people were required to pass a basic, and I mean BASIC intelligence/education/information test, the world would be a much, much better place. Too many imbeciles are allowed to decide the fate of all of us, esp. in the dumb states that get the same amount of representatives as the states that produce the revenue for this country.

I wouldn’t deny anyone the right to vote but I think there should be weighing of votes. A person with a high school or equivalent education, trade school, or a two year associate degree vote is weighted as 1. A person with simply a bachelors degree has their vote weighted as a 1.5. A person with a masters degree receives the equivalent of 2 votes. Those with a doctorate level education cap out at a 2.5.
In this fashion people with demonstrated intelligence are rightly rewarded in determining the government and the trajectory of society.

So you believe that somebody who chose to achieve a degree beyond high school is demonstrably more intelligent than those that did not, simply by virtue of choosing that path?
No points for trade school?

Wow.

Absolutely. All agree that we cannot have someone with lower education credentials deciding the fate of our nation. Most of them simply vote in emotional, short-term, self-interested, illogical outbursts. That’s how America got Trump.

Are you familiar with the Electoral College?

What does the EC have to do with weighing votes according to demonstrated intelligence level?

Are you really this poorly educated? You shouldn't even receive a single vote allowance.

Another camp was dead set against letting the people elect the president by a straight popular vote. First, they thought 18th-century voters lacked the resources to be fully informed about the candidates, especially in rural outposts. Second, they feared a headstrong “democratic mob” steering the country astray. And third, a populist president appealing directly to the people could command dangerous amounts of power.

https://www.history.com/news/electoral-college-founding-fathers-constitutional-convention

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know about changing the age limit, but if people were required to pass a basic, and I mean BASIC intelligence/education/information test, the world would be a much, much better place. Too many imbeciles are allowed to decide the fate of all of us, esp. in the dumb states that get the same amount of representatives as the states that produce the revenue for this country.

I wouldn’t deny anyone the right to vote but I think there should be weighing of votes. A person with a high school or equivalent education, trade school, or a two year associate degree vote is weighted as 1. A person with simply a bachelors degree has their vote weighted as a 1.5. A person with a masters degree receives the equivalent of 2 votes. Those with a doctorate level education cap out at a 2.5.
In this fashion people with demonstrated intelligence are rightly rewarded in determining the government and the trajectory of society.

So you believe that somebody who chose to achieve a degree beyond high school is demonstrably more intelligent than those that did not, simply by virtue of choosing that path?
No points for trade school?

Wow.

Absolutely. All agree that we cannot have someone with lower education credentials deciding the fate of our nation. Most of them simply vote in emotional, short-term, self-interested, illogical outbursts. That’s how America got Trump.

Are you familiar with the Electoral College?

What does the EC have to do with weighing votes according to demonstrated intelligence level?

Are you really this poorly educated? You shouldn't even receive a single vote allowance.

Another camp was dead set against letting the people elect the president by a straight popular vote. First, they thought 18th-century voters lacked the resources to be fully informed about the candidates, especially in rural outposts. Second, they feared a headstrong “democratic mob” steering the country astray. And third, a populist president appealing directly to the people could command dangerous amounts of power.

https://www.history.com/news/electoral-college-founding-fathers-constitutional-convention

So? America can keep the EC while still weighing votes to account for education achievement and intelligence level of voters. Your citation above makes my case form me as uneducated voters (ie republicans) are not fully informed due to intelligence, are a mob set on steering the country astray, and because of their low intelligence are very susceptible to being swayed by a populist demagogue.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If you're legally able to work and pay taxes, then you should be legally able to vote.[/quote]

I was working and paying taxes at four years old until I was like 15. Think, please. [/quote]

You were paying income taxes as a four year-old?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know about changing the age limit, but if people were required to pass a basic, and I mean BASIC intelligence/education/information test, the world would be a much, much better place. Too many imbeciles are allowed to decide the fate of all of us, esp. in the dumb states that get the same amount of representatives as the states that produce the revenue for this country.

I wouldn’t deny anyone the right to vote but I think there should be weighing of votes. A person with a high school or equivalent education, trade school, or a two year associate degree vote is weighted as 1. A person with simply a bachelors degree has their vote weighted as a 1.5. A person with a masters degree receives the equivalent of 2 votes. Those with a doctorate level education cap out at a 2.5.
In this fashion people with demonstrated intelligence are rightly rewarded in determining the government and the trajectory of society.

So you believe that somebody who chose to achieve a degree beyond high school is demonstrably more intelligent than those that did not, simply by virtue of choosing that path?
No points for trade school?

Wow.

Absolutely. All agree that we cannot have someone with lower education credentials deciding the fate of our nation. Most of them simply vote in emotional, short-term, self-interested, illogical outbursts. That’s how America got Trump.

Are you familiar with the Electoral College?

What does the EC have to do with weighing votes according to demonstrated intelligence level?

Are you really this poorly educated? You shouldn't even receive a single vote allowance.

Another camp was dead set against letting the people elect the president by a straight popular vote. First, they thought 18th-century voters lacked the resources to be fully informed about the candidates, especially in rural outposts. Second, they feared a headstrong “democratic mob” steering the country astray. And third, a populist president appealing directly to the people could command dangerous amounts of power.

https://www.history.com/news/electoral-college-founding-fathers-constitutional-convention

So? America can keep the EC while still weighing votes to account for education achievement and intelligence level of voters. Your citation above makes my case form me as uneducated voters (ie republicans) are not fully informed due to intelligence, are a mob set on steering the country astray, and because of their low intelligence are very susceptible to being swayed by a populist demagogue.

I am telling you that your humble proposal already exists. The Electoral College isn't binding in all states, so they really can just choose whoever they want. However, the Electoral College is extremely unpopular for some reason. It might be because the Electoral College awarded Trump the Presidency in 2016 counter to the popular vote.

It's not clear why I need to explain this to someone so erudite.

[Anonymous]

Why can't four year olds vote?

Whoever started this thread is a moron.

[Anonymous]

We'd end up with Kanye for President. No thank you.