Anonymous landtrust 1d

I’d say probably 65 instead. You supposed to retire around 65

1

Anonymous #2 1d

Yes, bc everyone over the age of 18 has the right to vote?

8

Anonymous #2 1d

But the simple solution to this is to make Election Day a holiday

11

Anonymous #3 1d

They should lose that right tbh

6

Anonymous #3 1d

Why is 18 the minimum? Cognitive ability. So why don’t we apply that to the other end?

7

Anonymous #2 1d

Great point

3

Anonymous #2 1d

18 is the minimum bc people believed that if you could be drafted to war you should vote after WWII Vietnam War only added to this sentiment

1

Anonymous #3 1d

Alright well then we need to limit the voting age to between 18 and 26.

-3

Anonymous #2 1d

We need a different voting system honestly, but that won’t ever happen

14

Anonymous OP 1d

Ranked choice voting would be a huge fix

11

Anonymous #2 1d

Are you serious? Do you actually think we should limit the voting age to between 18 and 26?

4

Anonymous #3 1d

I remember seeing a video on how best to represent a group of people and i think that voting method was ranked choice

12

Anonymous OP 23h

Ranked choice would also allow parties that aren’t the republicans or democrats to exist

13

Anonymous #3 23h

You’re the one saying that voting should be limited to draft eligible people. I guess that also means women can’t vote… this draft thing isn’t making any sense now that you think about it

0

Anonymous #2 23h

That wasn’t what I said, that was the reasoning behind why the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18, you said it was about cognitive ability which was demonstrably false

1

Anonymous #3 23h

So then why was it at 21 and why did we lower it for women if they can’t be drafted?

0

Anonymous #2 23h

Because it’s not equal.

8

Anonymous #2 23h

Tbh I don’t know, and because people didn’t want to be drafted if they couldn’t vote and it would be sexist to reduce the voting age for one gender but not for another

0

Anonymous #3 23h

When has sexism ever been an issue for this country? We force men to sign up for the draft but not women. So sure that’s the bullshit they feed us about the draft age and voting but it doesn’t actually make sense. The real answer is 18 is the age they consider you legally eligible to make your own decisions. I’d rather 17 year olds vote than some geriatric who can’t wipe their own ass

0

Anonymous #2 23h

That’s historically inaccurate, the push for the Amendment was made by young people protesting the Vietnam War and partially WWII, they believed they shouldn’t be eligible to drafted if they weren’t eligible to vote, please read your history please before being confidently wrong. Women were given the right to vote decades before so the only change was made to age.

0

Anonymous #3 23h

Then why was it 21 before motherfucker?! What makes that age so significant? You tiptoe around talking about history as if we all don’t know. Why is there a minimum at all? Why shouldn’t minors have rights? If we’re gonna let idiots who need a diaper so they don’t shit themselves why can’t babies vote?

0

Anonymous #2 23h

what makes any specific age significant ? thats not the point of the argument. Calm yourself.

7

Anonymous #2 23h

I said idk why it was 21, it was usually left up to the states but that’s ab all ik, I don’t know the specific arguments and justifications diff states used hundreds of years ago But mental competence as a barrier to voting seems simply like eugenics and we’ve been done with that since like the 1930s lol, let me guess, we should do literacy tests?

3

Anonymous #3 23h

If they are done fairly then yeah

0

Anonymous OP 23h

There is no doing them fairly bc they’re inherently unfair

3

Anonymous #3 23h

How so? And dude you don’t have to downvote me just because we have differing opinions. Its kind of petty. Im willing to listen to your side.

0

Anonymous OP 23h

Bc there are inherent differences in access to resources, poorer people have less access to educational resources and would be hurt by literacy tests they may not be able to pass as easily as wealthier, more privileged people Plus even if educational resources were equally distributed, this sort of test would still bar those with intellectual disabilities from civic participation which is ableist imo

4

Anonymous OP 23h

You’re right, age has no significance so let’s just go back to only land owning individuals can vote.

0

Anonymous #3 23h

Maybe some people shouldn’t be able to vote. I’m sorry if it’s “ableist” but we’re talking about the wellbeing of 300 million people. Maybe I don’t want someone who can’t mentally function on their own making those decisions.

0

Anonymous #3 23h

Hot take: ableism is not terrible in this regard. I dont know why people with severe intellectual disabilities are voting in the first place. But thats a topic for another day. The test itself would be hard to design for everyone but like education literally is available to everyone by law. It should be easy enough for poor people to pass. But poor people aren’t inherently stupid. Its more like Ive seen people harvesting votes from the geriatric old people before and its sad.

0

Anonymous #2 23h

Who will politically represent them? And how do we know this IQ test would improve the results of our political system?

5

Anonymous OP 23h

Yeah, that’s where we can agree to disagree. And I never said poor people were inherently less smart, intelligence is often measured in our society based on how many resources you have and is subjective (SATs, IQ tests) versus actual intelligence which is difficult to quantify

6

Anonymous #3 23h

Who politically represents felons? You dont

0

Anonymous OP 23h

I don’t think felons should lose the right to vote personally

4

Anonymous #3 23h

I can agree with that

2

Anonymous #3 23h

They can’t represent themselves? Their family and caretakers have to do that anyways.

-1

Anonymous #2 22h

Voting should be a right, not a privilege gained by intelligence. Government policies affect everyone, meaning everyone should have a say in them. Vulnerable populations need their vote to protect themselves from exploitation. Plus, setting intelligence barriers allows those in power to manipulate these tests. Look at the Jim Crow era South for example. IQ tests have been used to historically justify racism, eugenics, and the forced sterilization of Black people.

6

Anonymous #3 22h

Go ask someone with down syndrome what their favorite policy is…

-1

Anonymous OP 22h

People with Down syndrome can understand politics, it’s a cognitive spectrum

1

Anonymous #3 22h

Well that’s a bad faith argument if I’ve ever seen one. Unless of course you’re saying that African Americans were unable to cognitively function on their own..

-1

Anonymous #2 22h

Wait so let me get this straight? You are DEFENDING JIM CROW ERA LITERACY TESTS???)

5

Anonymous #2 22h

Please read a history book please

4

Anonymous #3 22h

And that’s a strawman. I never said anything in support of such tests. I said that you’re arguing in bad faith(or really racist) if you think allowing African Americans to vote is remotely comparable to letting the medically mentally incompetent vote.

-1

Anonymous #3 22h

You sound like a MAGA telling me to do my own research

-1

Anonymous #2 22h

I think you fundamentally are unable to understand my argument, IQ tests don’t measure intelligence, there is no objective way to do that, plus someone with a high IQ who knows nothing about politics may make a “worse” decision than someone with a lower IQ who is knowledgeable politically Plus, it would be much easier to exploit those with intellectual disabilities if you took their votes away, they couldn’t vote to protect themselves, this is true about any group

6

Anonymous #3 22h

1. I never said shit about IQ tests so maybe take that up with whoever did. 2. I don’t think there should be IQ tests, I think those deemed medically incompetent shouldn’t be able to vote, end of story. They can’t fucking function my guy, they can’t argue for themselves anyways.

0

Anonymous #2 22h

How do you know medically incompetent people can’t comprehend politics? That’s not what medically incompetent technically means, someone could be unable to care for themselves but more than capable of understand politics I just don’t think voting should be stripped away from groups of people

3

Anonymous #3 22h

If you cannot take care of yourself you cannot understand politics. Don’t even pretend that isn’t true. You think someone who can’t stay alive without constant support can understand the political consequences of tariffs, or someone who’s brain is permanently stuck at that of a 9 years olds can understand why an adult having romantic relationships with a minor is wrong?

-1

Anonymous #2 22h

Yes, 100% lol You can 100% be unable to take care of yourself but be able to read, write, and understand political theory I know multiple people like this who I have helped through the social work I’ve done They need permanent caretakers but are more than capable of understanding politics

5

Anonymous #2 21h

The cognitive test should be the citizenship test that immigrants need to pass. Has anyone thought of this yet? Are Americans so stupid that they cant pass their own test they make immigrants take?

1

Anonymous #3 21h

Yeah sure, and I can fully understand the struggle of African Americans in this country as a white guy from rural Kansas. I can read all about it but I can’t understand it, the personal impact, and I have no business telling other people how it should impact them

1

Anonymous #3 21h

Just like grandma with dementia can comprehend the political theory that Trump is the second coming of Christ and the libs are satanic.

1

Anonymous OP 21h

Lol yes we are, but I like this idea

0