this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2024
146 points (98.0% liked)

politics

23376 readers
3273 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Every minute Vance is spouting dumb shit rather than policy is a good minute for Harris-Walz.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 66 points 8 months ago (1 children)

JD Vance puts his cast iron in the dishwasher pass it on

[–] [email protected] 30 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Jorkin Dapenis Vance uses sugar substitute in his sweet tea. Pass it on.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

James David’s face when you call him Jorkin Dapenis

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Jelly Donut Vance puts the toilet paper on the far side of the holder, and doesn't have pets. Pass it on.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Jorts Dangler Vance has a secret humiliation fetish, pass it on.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

The answer is still no.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Children should be allowed to vote. Kids would show up in droves. They'd get their parents voting. I'd love seeing politicians that were forced to pander to young people. There's no downside.

[–] [email protected] 60 points 8 months ago (32 children)

People like Mr.Beast gain their massive success from producing overstimulating content that attracts a forever young audience that doesn't recognize the basic manipulation and scams that he employs.

This is what politics would turn into if we earnestly let kids vote. Manipulating child audiences is practically a science now.

Even discounting that, in 2016 when I was 16 I was a "both sides are bad" centrist type. I simply didn't have the roots to consider how things like basic public policies would affect me personally. You need some grounded experience in order to realize that the things on screen will affect you and your community directly.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 8 months ago (7 children)

That's crap. Kids don't outnumber adults, and politicians would still need to appeal to older generations.

Also, when you were 16, you were right. Both sides are bad. But one side is much, much worse. Politicians would need to spend some time and effort engaging with children and explaining why their policies do matter. Imagine how valuable that would be for a significant population of adults!

Kids are smarter than we give them credit for. They can smell bullshit, and they will vote their conscience.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I feel this would work in theory, but in practice the path of least resistance for a political party wouldn't be to appeal to young voters and teach policy. It would be to crank up the indoctrination machine and encourage parents to do so too.

I'm sure some families would teach their children how the world works, but most would just not change; or they'd indoctrinate and abuse their kids to supporting their political party (even harder than before).

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (31 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Most adults barely have a clue about the issues they're voting on, let alone kids. And many topics that are voted on aren't really appropriate for children to be discussing. Plus, would you really want our schools to become 6 hours of propaganda for whatever political party is in charge?

Children would be voting virtually at random, to the point where elections would essentially be decided by random chance.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

More adults would have a better idea if they had been voting as kids. And if you don't think topics like abortion affect kids, you're out of your fucking mind. Schools are already ideological battlefields, with conservatives posting pictures of Jesus and the 10 commandments, forcing kids to stand and pledge allegiance to their God, demanding kids conform to gender roles and societal norms. Shouldn't the people most affected by those decisions have some say in them?

Adults vote at random. We don't take away their right to vote just because they are uninformed.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

What topics are we voting that are not appropriate for children? I went to the polls with my dad almost every time he voted starting at age 6 and he talked with me about most of it.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I’d say the vast majority of things we vote on in politics can be discussed with children. Kids who are talked to like adults mature far more gracefully than those who are artificially shielded from anything mildly uncomfortable.

Politicians should have to explain directly to kids why their family is deep in medical debt. Or why they can’t have certain books in their library. Or why we should bomb children in other countries.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Politicians should have to explain directly to kids why their family is deep in medical debt. Or why they can’t have certain books in their library. Or why we should bomb children in other countries.

Are you absolutely insane? These are examples of things I don't want being discussed in my kids' classrooms (High school classrooms as a matter of general discussion notwithstanding). A 10 year old kid does not need to be spending his days discussing the world of geopolitics. There is a such thing as "age appropriate", you know.

When I was in kindergarten (back in the 70s), my teacher was Jewish. Do you know how she explained the difference between Christmas and Hannukah to us? "You know how Santa comes by and gives you some gifts on Christmas morning? Well instead of getting all the gifts at once they get 1 a day for a 8 days instead. You get to put up a tree, they use a menorah (while showing us one)"

We were 5 years old. Was that accurate? Not entirely. Was it enough for a 5 year old? Absolutely. "Jews celebrate things a little differently than you do, and that's OK". That's it. That was the message. And it's all we needed to know. We didn't need to get into some discussion over Israel or get into some religious viewpoints or anything. 5 year olds don't need to worry about that shit. Same thing applies here. We don't need to make them worry about topics that their parents probably barely understand. Your idea would destroy the mental health of children who are in no way prepared to handle and process those kind of topics.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

I think you underestimate the capability of children to understand sensitive topics and maintain their mental health. There’s not a lot of research on it either way yet, but the little I’ve seen is all in favor of having the difficult discussions with your kids, as early as possible.

Feel free to send me some peer reviewed research that says otherwise though, I’m always willing to listen if there are facts being brought to the table.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

Go to bed gramps

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] -5 points 8 months ago

Mother Jones - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Mother Jones:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/08/jd-vance-extra-votes-parents-children-families-thought-experiment/
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›