democrats are afraid of losing elections.

[Dextroden]

https://burruezolaw.com/employing-minors-child-labor/

Yes, this is Florida, but my point still stands. While I did forget 16+ didn't have an upper limit on total hours, scholl causes scheduling restrictions and anyone under 18 must be given a 30 minute break for every 4 hours.

I would imagine distinctions like that would vanish if you deem them fit enough to be of voting age.

And props to sunseeker. Reed Richards likes your reaching power.

[dragonballgtz]

Pretty sure I seen people argue about teenage brain development, in teenage murder threads, and how they're still are not mature enough to understand the consequences of their actions. If people want to try and make that argument then I think lowering the voting age would be a bad idea.

[Odinfrost]

WP-Democrats must pack the supreme court going forward per Washington Post- https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.26b2298f15df

You mean, like what Trump has done, and what any president, regardless of party affiliacion would have done? (as in stacking the court in their party's favor)

Is the electoral college fair- Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...toral-college/

Well, it was set up to make sure that there wouldn't be election fraud, but the only time it has ever worked to anyone's advantage it has been the Republicans, so I can understand why they are questioning it.

Majority of House Democrats Vote to Let 16-Year-Olds Vote for President- https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/03/...for-president/

Yeah... got nothing for this one aside that whatever age they will put as "old enough to vote" is abritrary to some degree (as is the case in any country)... Maybe there is some research for when is the "best" age to be allowed to vote, but I have no idea. But 16 does seem kinda on the edge as to vote. Some would definitely qualify for being mature enough to vote, but many would probably not... But then again, there are full grown adults who doesn't seem mature enough, so again, age thing is a really hard to nail down.

Who says these are improvements? Letting more dumb people vote is good for the country?

And who is to say that it isn't? It's like the whole gun debate. "Criminals will get their hands in guns anyway, so let's not even ATTEMPT to try or test sensible gun laws." With that mentality, why have any laws at all, as criminals will break them regardless?

I mean, seriously. The democrats proposed to make election day a semi-federal holiday, so people could take the day off if they used that day to vote, and the republicans called it a "power grab", for gods sake! Meanwhile, they themselves tries to make voter ID laws that would make it problematic for practically anyone involved to GET said ID.

Like the Green New Deal? It's pretty damn popular they should go 100 on it.

I dunno. I heard many people like the IDEA, but find the deal to be too optimistic or too fast to actually work and constructive critics said that it would be better to either A)Scale it down. B)Set a later deadline or C)Segment it so the country can adjust to the changes on top of extending the deadline for the whole thing.

And then there were the hard critics who said that the deal said that the country had to get rid of all their cars, boats, planes and cows which NOONE SUGGESTED THEY SHOULD DO!

[D Luniz]

*snip*

And then there were the hard critics who said that the deal said that the country had to get rid of all their cars, boats, planes and cows which NOONE SUGGESTED THEY SHOULD DO!

its nice your trying to be cordial by calling them "hard critics" but just call that spade a spade, they are liars plain and simple

[Mayhem]

https://burruezolaw.com/employing-minors-child-labor/

Yes, this is Florida, but my point still stands. While I did forget 16+ didn't have an upper limit on total hours, scholl causes scheduling restrictions and anyone under 18 must be given a 30 minute break for every 4 hours.

I would imagine distinctions like that would vanish if you deem them fit enough to be of voting age.

And props to sunseeker. Reed Richards likes your reaching power.

So about that federal part?

[Arvei]

Some nice projection there from the OP. Why do republicans want less people voting?

[Endus]

Because the new proposed demographics would make their party almost irrelevant?

Democratic systems of governance, whether through direct democracy or representation, are fundamentally about allowing the demographics to determine the government.

Any attempt to manipulate the demographic to protect a particular party is aggressively undemocratic.

I am really struggling with most responses in this topic.

Why is it so hard to acknowledge there's a struggle for power ongoing, and each side wants to modify the terms of battle to favor their side. Closed (south) border makes sense from a Republican perspective. It allows in people that are voting 80% or something with their opponents. Allowing more latino immigration, especially from young people, would be suicidal and would make them lose power even faster. Having 16 yrs old kids vote would also be (almost) as bad for Republicans.

You're describing the Republican point of view; that this is all about power and control.

That is not the Democratic Party's point of view, at all, and that's where your argument breaks down completely.

[Dextroden]

Democratic systems of governance, whether through direct democracy or representation, are fundamentally about allowing the demographics to determine the government.

Any attempt to manipulate the demographic to protect a particular party is aggressively undemocratic.



You're describing the Republican point of view; that this is all about power and control.

That is not the Democratic Party's point of view, at all, and that's where your argument breaks down completely.

If they weren't interested in power and control, they wouldn't spin their own version of division. Beware of the evil racist white men and their spooky privilege.

[Daelak]

If they weren't interested in power and control, they wouldn't spin their own version of division. Beware of the evil racist white men and their spooky privilege.

It isn't a threat, it's publicly available information with historical evidence supporting said actions by that party.

Progressive politics has always been about the pursuit of equal representation and equal protection under the law. You as a young black man in Jacksonville should be acutely aware of this.

[Endus]

If they weren't interested in power and control, they wouldn't spin their own version of division. Beware of the evil racist white men and their spooky privilege.

Democrats aren't acting like white men are "racist and evil". Nor is pursuing an agenda aimed at eliminating discrimination and injustice in any way an assault on white people.

You're making all this shit up.

[Dextroden]

It isn't a threat, it's publicly available information with historical evidence supporting said actions by that party.

Progressive politics has always been about the pursuit of equal representation and equal protection under the law. You as a young black man in Jacksonville should be acutely aware of this.

No, it hasn't. If it did, we wouldn't be using the idea of white privilege to justify being hateful to others based on appearance.

How weird that the people that cry the most about equality despise it.

- - - Updated - - -

Democrats aren't acting like white men are "racist and evil". Nor is pursuing an agenda aimed at eliminating discrimination and injustice in any way an assault on white people.

You're making all this shit up.

Is that why Democrats and their voting base complained about uneducated white men in the same way they say Republicans sit around moaning about minorities? Because it's not about revenge?

And you're not eliminating discrimination by saying all white people are better off purely for being white.

[Daelak]

No, it hasn't. If it did, we wouldn't be using the idea of white privilege to justify being hateful to others based on appearance.

How weird that the people that cry the most about equality despise it.

It isn't just an "idea". It's a falsifiable, directly observed phenomenon in our society. It is only now labeled white privilege in society due to more freedom and protection under the law. Without landmark civil rights movements during the early 20th century, as well as Brown v. Board of Education, the CRA, VRA, your own life would be horrendously worse off.

[Eviscero]

An easy alternative would be "have you graduated from high school?" If you rush your education and graduate at 16, sure, vote. It's a really simple and objective determination. You can "test out" by getting your GED. And if you can't graduate/get delayed, your 18th birthday still gives you the vote; you just have to provide either proof of age or proof of graduation.



The real question, right there.

An objective measure that will reflect systemic bias and institutionalized racism. I'm surprised by this post from Endus of all people.

[Dextroden]

It isn't just an "idea". It's a falsifiable, directly observed phenomenon in our society. It is only now labeled white privilege in society due to more freedom and protection under the law. Without landmark civil rights movements during the early 20th century, as well as Brown v. Board of Education, the CRA, VRA, your own life would be horrendously worse off.

So why are there any white people with less anything than minorities? Can't have it where white people only favor white people and yet we have poor, undereducated and unemployed white people.

Why isn't their privilege doing anything?

[Endus]

So why are there any white people with less anything than minorities? Can't have it where white people only favor white people and yet we have poor, undereducated and unemployed white people.

Why isn't their privilege doing anything?

Pretending that you don't understand the difference between demographic groups and individuals is not an argument at all.

- - - Updated - - -

An objective measure that will reflect systemic bias and institutionalized racism. I'm surprised by this post from Endus of all people.

It was a suggestion that was intended to be easy, not one that was meant to amend societal injustices.

[Dextroden]

Pretending that you don't understand the difference between demographic groups and individuals is not an argument at all.

- - - Updated - - -



It was a suggestion that was intended to be easy, not one that was meant to amend societal injustices.

It isn't "white" privilege if it doesn't affect all white people, now does it? And if it's individuals, why do people keep throwing it as a catch all?

Sounds more like wealth privilege instead of your racist belief.

[Bodakane]

It isn't "white" privilege if it doesn't affect all white people, now does it? And if it's individuals, why do people keep throwing it as a catch all?

Sounds more like wealth privilege instead of your racist belief.

lol.....wealth?

Are african americans more likely to be poor because of systemic institutional racism or because there is a flaw in them and/or their culture?

[Dextroden]

lol.....wealth?

Are african americans more likely to be poor because of systemic institutional racism or because there is a flaw in them and/or their culture?

But how can there be any poor white people as they are privileged and born with a small loan of a million dollars?

[Endus]

It isn't "white" privilege if it doesn't affect all white people, now does it? And if it's individuals, why do people keep throwing it as a catch all?

Sounds more like wealth privilege instead of your racist belief.

Man, you really don't understand the difference between demographic groups and individuals, do you?

Your post makes no sense whatsoever; it just demonstrates that you have no idea what some of those terms mean, because you're using them incorrectly.

- - - Updated - - -

But how can there be any poor white people as they are privileged and born with a small loan of a million dollars?

Case in point; that's not what "white privilege" means.

You really shouldn't be speaking about a subject you've made no effort to understand.

[Bodakane]

But how can there be any poor white people as they are privileged and born with a small loan of a million dollars?

That is precisely like saying how can there be global warming if today is cold.

All it does is illustrate you don;t understand the concepts you are arguing.