How do people feel about allowing sixteen-year-old teenagers to vote?

[Laffy Kat]

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

[Hekate]

1. No

[Laffy Kat]

5. Why? nt

[brush]

9. They're still under their parents influence.

And most are usually conservative because of that as they've not matured enough to form their own opinions.

No.

[Laffy Kat]

10. But wasn't that the same argument used against women?

They would simply vote the way their husbands told them to?

[brush]

17. That's hyperbole about women IMO. Ya think all women...

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]

21. Once again, same argument against women.

That our minds were too simple and unable to understand politics. I don't think it hyperbolic at all.

[brush]

23. You don't think it was hyperbole to women?

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]

35. It doesn't mean that argument against women was valid,

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]

38. Right, 16 year olds WILL have the right to vote once they reach 18 . THe comparison to adult women

who were the same age as the men who could vote is just silly .

[Laffy Kat]

39. But the argument against women was believed to be valid at the time.

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]

46. It was not believed to be valid at the time which is why women were demanding

the right to vote then.

[Crunchy Frog]

60. Some people believed that argument against women was valid,

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]

79. You're comparing 16 year old kids to adult women of any age?

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]

71. You're comparing women to 16 year olds?

Oh ffs.

[trueblue2007]

57. . No ... too young

[Ms. Toad]

63. Its barely a year ahead of when they can vote now.

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]

2. No.

[Laffy Kat]

6. Why? nt

[greenjar_01]

3. The age at which you should be allowed to vote in a state should match the age at which

you can be tried as an adult for a crime in that state.

[Laffy Kat]

7. OK.That's interesting.

Thanks.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

41. That would lower the voting age to 13 in some places.

[Laffy Kat]

44. I'm actually ok with that, too.

Something tells me that if we had 13- to-17 year-olds voting we wouldn't have children in cages.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

48. Except the reality is, that the youngest voters

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]

53. I'm not convinced. Kids are smarter than we give them credit for.

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]

83. Whether they vote or not is immaterial

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]

81. If the state believes that 13 year olds have adult decision-making capacities, that should

apply to voting as well.

[Crunchy Frog]

61. It should match the age at which you will ALWAYS

be tried as an adult in that state.

[greenjar_01]

82. I can see your point here, but trying anyone as an adult means the state believes

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]

4. No. Young People already don't vote much. How about those who can vote actually do so ?

Waste of time issue .

[Laffy Kat]

15. Why does that make a difference?

A large percentage of people over 18 don't vote either.

[JI7]

18. That's my point, get those who CAN vote to do so. 16 is only 2 years away from 18

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]

22. Don't you think teenagers have more at stake than say a 60-year-old? nt

[JI7]

27. That depends on many things . But they CAN vote in 2 years. Before that you will have people like

the Duggar Dad getting over 20 votes .

[Laffy Kat]

30. Duggar Dad is going to get 20 votes anyway.

I doubt any of the Duggar adult children are more enlightened than their 16-year-old siblings.

[JI7]

34. The girls who have left the house have started to live more normal lives and send their kids to

school and dress more normal .

[Laffy Kat]

36. I hope you're right and they will be able to look at their conditioned values critically.

Remember, a lot of 16 - 17 year-olds are rebellious and may vote with more independence as a way to express their individuality.

[Doreen]

8. NO

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]

13. But isn't that true of everyone?

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]

33. As I said some teenagers were more mature and engaged in the world around them.

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]

11. I think that's too young

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]

14. Do you think the majority of adults truly grasp the complexities of social studies?

I don't think so and I think our current President reflects that ignorance.

[Poiuyt]

24. That's true, but there is a higher percentage of adults who are knowledgable than 16 year olds

[Laffy Kat]

26. How do we know this? nt

[Demsrule86]

12. No.

[Laffy Kat]

19. Reason?nt

[radical noodle]

16. Based entirely on what I was like at 16,

I would vote no.

[littlemissmartypants]

20. YES!

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]

25. Thank you!

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]

28. You're welcome, Laffy Kat. ❤ nt

[Sympthsical]

37. Race and sex are immutable characteristics with no bearing on intelligence

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]

42. So by your logic an 18-year-old high-school drop out.

Who reads everything she can get her hands on regarding current affairs, history, etc. would not be eligible to vote?

[Sympthsical]

88. As I said, we draw lines

And I said opportunity. A drop out still has the opportunity.

We’ve decided 18 years is the line to adulthood. You say, why not lower it two years? I don’t 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 haven’t really given any good evidence that more uninformed voting is a good thing. Why do you want more uninformed voters with less judgement? What’s the net benefit there? “Just because,” isn’t much of an answer.

You keep positing exceptions. There are always exceptions. But I haven’t heard any evidence whatsoever that making a general rule for 16 years old is sound.

[Laffy Kat]

90. I don't know what evidence I could possibly give.

You said yourself it's all arbitrary. All your reasons not to allow are just as subjective as mine.

[JI7]

29. 18 , 19, 20 year olds are Kids also and they CAN vote .

[Laffy Kat]

31. So why not lower it just two years? nt

[JI7]

32. So people like the Duggar dad don't get more votes

[Withywindle]

66. Not all kids would vote with their parents

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]

40. No. And before you ask... for all the No reasons

others offered.

If you’re so for child suffrage, why did you suggest 16 and not 12 or 10?

[Laffy Kat]

47. If you read my OP, you would see I asked about 16-year-olds because of the ballot issue...

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]

43. Max Frost and the Troopers -- Fourteen or Fight

[Laffy Kat]

51. I haven't thought about "Wild in the Streets" in a long time.

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.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

45. Nope. I'll just repeat what others have already said

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]

55. It was lowered to 18 because of Vietnam n/t

[JonLP24]

94. I was taught critical thinking in school

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]

49. Yes...

-

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]

50. Based on brain development, maybe the voting age

should be raised to 23.

[AmyStrange]

52. Maybe brain scans should be required before you can vote, and...

-

then the only people left will be democrats!

Yay!
=========

[Withywindle]

67. That would rule out a HUGE number of our constituency, so hell no

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]

54. Thanks everyone for responding!

[betsuni]

56. I say yes.

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]

58. I find it interesting that

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]

69. I was one the of the 18 yr olds...

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]

59. Maybe. I have mixed feelings about it.

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.

[Meowmee]

62. no

[marlakay]

65. I guess the ones who would actually vote

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]

68. I don't.

[dawg day]

70. Sure. They will have to live longest with the laws

that are enacted now.

[cwydro]

72. No.

[radius777]

73. No, the fundies who have 10 kids would round em up and

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]

74. Absolutely yes.

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]

75. I would have voted for John Kerry if that was the law in 2004

[NurseJackie]

76. Let them volunteer. Not vote.

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]

77. No, for the same reason I don't believe

they should be tried as adults at 16. They’re children. I have a 16yr old; I have to remind her to put on deodorant, ffs. She’s as lefty as they come, but still lacks critical thinking skills. She’ll be fine waiting a few years.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

78. I can't think of a reason against it.

[former9thward]

80. Beyond stupid.

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]

85. 18, 19 and 20 year olds can't legally drink, so, by that logic, they shouldn't be able to vote.

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]

89. We let people serve in the military at 17 as well

Though you need parental consent at that age.

I always found it odd you could join the military but couldn't drink.

[former9thward]

91. A 16 year old can't operate 3,000 hunks of metal in many states.

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]

92. 35 states allow 16 & 17 year olds to get a license.

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]

93. I know people of all ages that don't vote

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]

84. I don't have a problem with it.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

86. 17 year olds can vote in primaries in many states

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]

87. I think municipal and state elections could be interesting.

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.