Yes to young people and non US citizens to vote in local elections?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am leaning towards that but would like to see your response

See places where this has happened and voter registries temperings are rampant. Some bus in the voters and make sure they fulfill the bare minimum of voting rights and some places even compensate for their "time". It's a slippery slope. It should be a firm no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Voting is a privilege of citizenship

No. This.

Precisely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure. You want my 15 year old, who along with all her friends, thinks money comes from “the government” to vote locally. On things like bond referendums. Or people who got here 3 months ago, haven’t paid a penny in taxes yet but are already net consumers of public benefits, to elect politicians who will give them more free stuff.

Yeah great. Great plan.

JFC, we’re doomed.

I don't agree, but old people in that case would be a much bigger concern. Many of them are basically single-issue voters focused on how much the government will boost their SS and Medicare handouts next year.

They worked to earn credits for that. The Cola is set into law. Voting not to have their benefits cut at an age where they can't make up the income is not at all the same as voting for new freebies.

Not the PP but I don't think either of you are keeping in mind a key point here.

We are talking about local elections (likely Rockville). What exactly do you think are the "new freebies" that anyone thinks they are going to get by voting for a particular candidate, in particular a teenager?

Teenagers are ok if citizens.

Non-cictizens are an interested stakeholder that is further easily manipulated. That's a firm no. They can put anything on the referendum from IDs to handouts to zoning rules to further changes of voting rights to being able to run businesses without licence and inspection like has happened in DC. It is a firm no and a terrible idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nope. Voting was intended to be a privilege not a right. It’s the very thing that separates US CITIZENS from the rest of the world. And few below 18 are informed enough to deserve that privilege ( Mom of two teens here). How about we just focus on getting those who are actually eligible to vote to get out and vote. That’s the best way to ensure equality and equity- that every qualified citizen have the faie access to vote and societal pressure to actually exercise that privilege.

Agreed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am leaning towards that but would like to see your response

See places where this has happened and voter registries temperings are rampant. Some bus in the voters and make sure they fulfill the bare minimum of voting rights and some places even compensate for their "time". It's a slippery slope. It should be a firm no.

Do you have any cites for this? Because I did indeed look and don't see any.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure. You want my 15 year old, who along with all her friends, thinks money comes from “the government” to vote locally. On things like bond referendums. Or people who got here 3 months ago, haven’t paid a penny in taxes yet but are already net consumers of public benefits, to elect politicians who will give them more free stuff.

Yeah great. Great plan.

JFC, we’re doomed.

I don't agree, but old people in that case would be a much bigger concern. Many of them are basically single-issue voters focused on how much the government will boost their SS and Medicare handouts next year.

They worked to earn credits for that. The Cola is set into law. Voting not to have their benefits cut at an age where they can't make up the income is not at all the same as voting for new freebies.

Not the PP but I don't think either of you are keeping in mind a key point here.

We are talking about local elections (likely Rockville). What exactly do you think are the "new freebies" that anyone thinks they are going to get by voting for a particular candidate, in particular a teenager?

Teenagers are ok if citizens.

Non-cictizens are an interested stakeholder that is further easily manipulated. That's a firm no. They can put anything on the referendum from IDs to handouts to zoning rules to further changes of voting rights to being able to run businesses without licence and inspection like has happened in DC. It is a firm no and a terrible idea.

What do you mean by the bolded?

[Anonymous]

All of you wanting to require tests and (essentially) income requirements to vote… do you hear yourselves? Do you have any knowledge of history & how these things have been used to disenfranchise people? Or you just don’t care, as long as your side wins?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am leaning towards that but would like to see your response

See places where this has happened and voter registries temperings are rampant. Some bus in the voters and make sure they fulfill the bare minimum of voting rights and some places even compensate for their "time". It's a slippery slope. It should be a firm no.

Do you have any cites for this? Because I did indeed look and don't see any.

Happening all over Europe and LatAm. Haven't looked at the cities here but they ain't doing so hot. This is a terrible, terrible idea.

It will take one smart politician and it's done. They are already bussing in immigrants from Florida. Instead of releasing them by the VP's house, it will take them 2 minutes to realize they can stack them in a motel for a month and have them vote. Bye democracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure. You want my 15 year old, who along with all her friends, thinks money comes from “the government” to vote locally. On things like bond referendums. Or people who got here 3 months ago, haven’t paid a penny in taxes yet but are already net consumers of public benefits, to elect politicians who will give them more free stuff.

Yeah great. Great plan.

JFC, we’re doomed.

I don't agree, but old people in that case would be a much bigger concern. Many of them are basically single-issue voters focused on how much the government will boost their SS and Medicare handouts next year.

They worked to earn credits for that. The Cola is set into law. Voting not to have their benefits cut at an age where they can't make up the income is not at all the same as voting for new freebies.

Not the PP but I don't think either of you are keeping in mind a key point here.

We are talking about local elections (likely Rockville). What exactly do you think are the "new freebies" that anyone thinks they are going to get by voting for a particular candidate, in particular a teenager?

Teenagers are ok if citizens.

Non-cictizens are an interested stakeholder that is further easily manipulated. That's a firm no. They can put anything on the referendum from IDs to handouts to zoning rules to further changes of voting rights to being able to run businesses without licence and inspection like has happened in DC. It is a firm no and a terrible idea.

What do you mean by the bolded?

It's an interest group on a lot of issues, like: no inspections or permits needed for a business, IDs, voting laws, non-citizen rights. Also a group that is in a precarious position, with less financial security. You don't think you can drive the =m to vote and pay them for their time? Ahem.