Voting at age 16, trouble ahead?

Fukuyama

The Constitutional Convention being held this weekend just voted in favor of lowering the voting age to sixteen.

Fifty-two delegates voted in favour of lowering the voting age while 47 of those present voted against the idea and one had no opinion.

http://jrnl.ie/771334

I'm 21 now and and fairly interested in politics, current affairs and so on.

I remember thinking when I was sixteen that I should have been allowed vote. Now however, I'm completely against it.

Looking back I remember how immature I was - often believing stupid statements and promises made by both sides but in particular the hard left.

I'm sure there are sixteen year old's mature enough to cast a vote they truly believe in - but, in general, it's too young for many still going through the normal teen rebellion crap.

I could see Sinn Fein in particular targeting these voters with patriotic **** as they already do with their own youth organisations and others aligned with them.

What think ye, AH? Should the nippers be allowed vote after the Junior Cert is over and done with?

SafeSurfer

I think the voting age should be increased to 30, just to annoy all those eager enthusiastic transition year students.

GRMA

Well as long as the women can't vote I'll be happy, I mean they're very out of touch and just can't understand politics like us men can, its too much for their little heads to handle, figuring out how to feed and cook and clean as well as giving birth is enough to keep them going, wouldn't want to burden them them with hard stuff like politics, they wouldnt understand and would vote stupidly


Sound familiar OP?

My name is URL

Plenty of 16/17 year olds are in full time employment and contribute to the exchequer just as much as older adults. They should have a say in their own futures just as much as anyone else.

Not every 17 year old is a stupid impressionable child. Many are more mature than some 30 year olds.

blue note

Sure even if they allow it, very few 16 year olds will vote anyway. And if immaturity and stupidity is a reason to deny them the vote, then there are lots of people over 18 that should lose their right. So I say if they want to get involved and vote, let them.

landsleaving

I'd have no problem with it whatsoever. Age isn't a measure of maturity or intelligence.

_sparkie_

I think it would be more important to make voting compulsory rather then lowering the age.

Vito Corleone

No, they shouldn't be allowed to vote. Most 16 year olds are idiots.

Max Power

At 16 I was fingering chung wans down the local disco like there was no tomorrow. I doubt many 16 year olds have an interest in voting.

Quazzie

I can see this resulting in a huge surge in votes for SF

SafeSurfer

My name is URL wrote: »

Plenty of 16/17 year olds are in full time employment and contribute to the exchequer just as much as older adults. They should have a say in their own futures just as much as anyone else.

Not every 17 year old is a stupid impressionable child. Many are more mature than some 30 year olds.

Plenty of 16 year olds are in full time employment?

If you had said few 16 year olds are in full time employment this would be true but to say plenty, as in a large number are, is quite simply rubbish.

SafeSurfer

_sparkie_ wrote: »

I think it would be more important to make voting compulsory rather then lowering the age.

It would have to be put to a referendum where turnout would probably be in the low 20s.

Fukuyama

blue note wrote: »

Sure even if they allow it, very few 16 year olds will vote anyway. And if immaturity and stupidity is a reason to deny them the vote, then there are lots of people over 18 that should lose their right. So I say if they want to get involved and vote, let them.

Fair point.

Fromthetrees

I think it would favor the left leaning parties but it'll help get more people tuned into politics from a younger age which can only be a good thing.

Chips Lovell

My gut says that 16 is too young, but then, as someone else has already pointed out, if you look at the number of adults who really aren't copped on enough to be voting either, then what's the harm?

If you're old enough to pay taxes, you should have a say.

robman60

This is awful. They'll almost all be voting with what their friends think is cool.

Fr_Dougal

A vote for lols, Justin Beiber and Jedward.

Mother. Of. God.

mikom

Bring on the cannabis referendum.

phasers

I know plenty of 18 year old idiots, the voting age should be raised to 45. Those guys know what's what.

Fukuyama

robman60 wrote: »

This is awful. They'll almost all be voting with what their friends think is cool.

In the last general election my Facebook stream was full of "Ehhh...who shud I vote 4?? ha" type posts.

Some adults aren't up to the task either.

*sigh*

I guess the only solution is the need to sit some kind of exam in order to get a polling card.

My name is URL

Quazzie wrote: »

I can see this resulting in a huge surge in votes for SF

And that's exactly the reason why it will be rejected out of hand by our government.. the lovers of democracy that they are!

Fluorescence

The only 16 year olds who will actually bother voting are those who are very interested in politics. Most won't bother their holes. No harm done.

The amount of 30/40/50 year olds around who haven't a clue and vote based on the signs on lamp-posts will far outweigh a handful of under 18s.

Sinfonia

Dean0088 wrote: »

Looking back I remember how immature I was - often believing stupid statements and promises made by both sides but in particular the hard left.

Regardless of age, most people are too uninformed to vote, left or right.

I'd either open it to every single person or close it for everyone.

I don't think any age bracket would make a difference to the ultimate results.
Only allow 25-45 year olds to vote, the outcome's gonna be the same.

woodchuck

When I rule the world there will be no age limit associated with voting, but everyone casting their vote will have to take a short exam on the topic at hand. If anyone scores less than 70% their vote will not count.

Woodchuck for World President :P

TeddyTedson

Perhaps there should be a cutoff point for voting too.
I mean the over 80s, should they really have a say in the future of our country?
Also people with mental health issues. Should they be allowed to vote considering they're sick.

/Sarcasm

P_1

Now are the turkeys in power going to vote for Christmas?

From what I can tell this Convention can only make recommendations not actually change the law.

I expect to see an X Case type burial of this by the powers that be

landsleaving

woodchuck wrote: »

When I rule the world there will be no age limit associated with voting, but everyone casting their vote will have to take a short exam on the topic at hand. If anyone scores less than 70% their vote will not count.

Woodchuck for World President :P

And who administers the test, you? Your government?

Some democracy your dictatorship is going to be!

Chips Lovell

P_1 wrote: »

I expect to see an X Case type burial of this by the powers that be

The government called the convention and lowering of the voting age was one of nine items it asked it to address. Surely if it wanted no change in the voting age, it wouldn't have put it on the agenda in the first place?

P_1

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

The government called the convention and lowering of the voting age was one of nine items it asked it to address. Surely if it wanted no change in the voting age, it wouldn't have put it on the agenda in the first place?

Perhaps I'm being cynical about the Convention and thinking that the government only established it to placate the masses...

L.Jenkins

My name is URL wrote: »

...Not every 17 year old is a stupid impressionable child. Many are more mature than some 30 year olds.

Not every 17 might be childish, but they're far more common at that age. I'd agree with keeping the voting age at 18.

hatrickpatrick

I was into politics when I was 16, got involved in Save Our Seafront in Dun Laoghaire and stuff like that. My voting pattern hasn't changed, the people I vote for has purely based on the fact that their policies have changed over time but the policies I look for in a candidate are still more or less the same.