Republicans want to raise voting age to 21

Unlike your own thread, "Great Moments in Racial Hate Hoaxes?"

 

According to Neurologist, the human brain is fully formed at 25. Therefore, I think that the legal age for everything, including the vote and age at which a person can fight in a war, let alone drink, should be 25.

 

That thread is about actual reported hoaxes. This thread is about....?

 

What on Earth are you talking about? He made a claim and didn't back it up. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

 

I think fellow conservatives can respectfully disagree over issues. Besides, I think we both can agree that young voters are a problem when many of them don't really think past "free stuff" being promised to them. Biden's blantant attempt to buy some of their votes with student loan forgiveness is an insult to their intelligence. He must think they're really stupid to think a 10k write off is really going to make a difference.

 

Who specifically is hatching a plan to move voting age to 21?

 

And I can always support my claims. Can you?...lol

 

Gotta be 21 to own a handgun. So, why not?

 

And the righties on this thread who bleated at him about it are the worst offenders, therefore hypocrites imo.

 

I always do, without having to be asked. You know that.

 

The Democratic party. For it opposes specieism. The members of the party promote art which one can't tell from that produced by dogs: http://reverent.org/bremen_artists.html

 

Hmmm. He made a claim without a link or even a name of someone doing as he claimed. Asking for such is by no means "a ridiculous question". In fact, it seems that 8 or 10 other people also asked for some type of supporting link.

You are coming out firing both barrels, but why? My goodness, it is 100% acceptable to ask someone to substantiate a claim that they make.

While running interference for the OP you come up with a radio personality no one has heard of? LOL. Well, that was just the sort of irrelevant connection without an actual legislative connection that I was implying/guessing that it would be. Thanks for that, although I was actually not asking for your link, I was asking for his. Afterall, he made the claim and knows to whom he was referring, NOT you.

 

Yeah, but then Republicans can always say that Democrats want people whose brains are not fully mature and who are less wise to vote because they tend to vote Democrat, and that's the Democrat's plan. And it's not something worth bragging about. The voting age should be 25, as that is the age in which the prefrontal cortex is fully developed and in which people have more life experience to make better-informed decisions.

You do make a good point, though, about the GOP: people whose brains are more developed and are more wiser tend to vote Republican. It's true. So, thank you for that.

 

Young people can be very observant. They may not have the life experiences as someone who is in their 40s, 50s, or even 60s, but they can be very observant. But it also gives them a say in what the course of this nation should be like, and that is what this nation was founded on, was it not?

 

Young people can be very observant. But anyone can be very observant, but not understand the depths of their observations. An 18-year-old's observations, generally speaking, are going to be shallower than that of a 25-year-old's. Generally speaking, 25-year-olds make better decisions, as their prefrontal cortex, which is fundamental to decision making, is fully developed and this is intermixed with the fact that they have more experience with the real world than 18-year-olds, who, at best, are just starting life outside the domain of their parents, or, at worse, who are still living with their parents.

 

Understanding the depths is what we call experience generally. But I am happy for young people at least taking an interest in deciding who their political leaders are, for better or worse.

 

I already explained in my post, that the specific names, since they were unlikely to be recognizable to most or all PF members, including you, are not really consequential. IOW, asking the OP to cite a source is, of course, common practice. In this case, however, having that source enumerate names, particularly if we have numerous, credible sources, reporting the same information, doesn't rise to being the sole litmus of the validity of the source's reporting.

Your objection, here, is coming after the fact, of both my quoting 2 different news sources (the New Republic, and the Daily Beast) with this story, including one's listing of some conservative names. Additionally, Overitall had posted, that a simple Google search, called up names, for him. So it seems that you are arguing with me, now, for no purpose, other than just to argue.

 

I think you are making an unwarranted assumption, that young voters do not consider anything beyond "free stuff," to a greater degree than other voters, whose votes can be "bought" through any one given policy-- as, for example, Pro-Life voters, or 2nd Amendment voters. Also, what about those voters who "don't really think past (the) 'free stuff'" of getting a tax break?

So, I think your differentiating young voters, this way, is not credible. While you may argue that you believe tax breaks, for instance-- besides benefitting some people-- is also a policy that is good for the country; so is it easy, to make the case that society's investing in citizens' education, is good for the country, overall.

 

Since they are unlikely to be recognizable as you state, do you not understand that is precisely why I asked the question?

You are blathering on about how you think my question was "ridiculous" while at the same time, your answers are illustrating EXACTLY what I set out to illustrate by asking that question. This is not a serious proposal that is going to be seriously debated in the legislature. This is little more than the Daily Beast and the New Republic trying to stir sh*t for the express purpose of stirring sh*t. To call it much ado about nothing is an understatement.

Mission accomplished. Thank you for your assistance, albeit with a side of misplaced ire.

 

Prove it.

 

Kids I known are a lot wiser than maga voters.
They can smell lying bullshit a mile away.

 

Keeping women barefoot and pregnant, kids uneducated and minorities in their place is the maga dream.

 

So, they know Russia collusion was a lie?

 

All the ghettos are in Democrat controlled cities.

 

Back to my Ignore list you go.