What is so great about it? Not trying to offend anyone, but give me one reason why I should pay attention to politics. It just seems like sides are constantly arguing over a subject.
politics are not only important because of the elections, but also because the political decisions affect your everydays life. you have plenty of opportunities to be politically active like joining organizations, debating on forums(or other discussion platforms), creating initiatives or demonstrating. i think it is very important to know whats happening in the world and making up opinions on important topics,so you dont have to do what other people are saying but you can represent your own point of view.
There are some people under 18 I know that are informed and responsible enough to make an informed decision. However, there are not enough who can to make a difference.
I know I should be able to vote even though I'm still a kid. I have a job, and I know enough about politics to make an informed decision unlike most other kids, they just go with whatever they see on TV.
The very fact you believe that you are qualified to say who should be able to vote or not, leads me to the conclusion you should not be able to vote.
Hint, watching the news everyday doesn't make you qualified. Getting a job and paying taxes, that's what makes you qualified.
Hint, watching the news everyday doesn't make you qualified. Getting a job and paying taxes, that's what makes you qualified.
I agree. Contribute to the system that you're being given control of. Being informed doesn't make you eligible to vote; it means you've got the information to not blindly choose a candidate or choice, (if you're voting for an initiative or referendum) but unless you're putting into the cookie jar, don't expect to get something back.
Well if she's over 18 then i agree but if shes under 18 it's not her fault she can't vote..
She is 14, but I said she wants to be able to bitch about it and shouldn't have to vote. Implying that when she's of age she can bitch but still not contribute.
since when is earning money a criterium to be allowed to vote. every citizen of a country has the right to chose his representation. the age of 18 is randomly taken, because then you are an adult and you are said to be responsible enough to make your choices. of course there are 14 years old who already can and 35 year olds who cannot, but statisticly at the age of 18 you have more responsibility and in most countries have graduated from school. and there is no reason why people with jobs should only get to vote. if that would happen it would be the greatest discrimination of all times.
what do you want to propose next? that people get an amount of voices depending on how much taxes they pay???
Alright according to the U.S. [url=http://www.bls.gov/cps/ Bureau of Labor Statistics] in 2008 8,924,000 American's didn't have jobs. According to a [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008 Wikipedia article on the presidential election of 2008] 69,456,897 people voted for Obama, and 59,934,814people voted for McCain making a total of 131,257,328 Americans that voted in the election (2 million people voted for other candidates.) With the American population roughly 300 million people the percent that voted in the election is 43.7%. Now through a bit of intelligent guesswork we can say that 43.7% of unemployed Americans voted in the 2008 election which means roughly 3,899,788 unemployed American's voted in the election. Now with 52.9% of American's voting for Obama and 45.66% of American's voting for McCain we can guess that Obama would have received about 2,061,400 less votes and McCain receiving 1,838,388 less votes. That's all based on already known statistics, however we can infer that Obama most likely would have received more of those votes due to the Democrat partys advantage with lower class Americans, which most of these people would have been. If jobless Americans couldn't vote this might have swung the election if the right amount of people voted for McCain in certain states, but proably the results would have been roughly the same.
(sorry if the links don't but i can repost them if necissary.)
I really don't see how you can conclude that because 47.3% of the American population voted in the elections that 47.3% of unemployed people voted in the elections. Generally the unemployed come from demographics that have very low participation rates, and so 47.3% is pretty unfeasible. In any case, even if we take these statistics to be true, around 1% of the people voting in the elections being unemployed would not justify extending the vote to minors.
I really don't see how you can conclude that because 47.3% of the American population voted in the elections that 47.3% of unemployed people voted in the elections. Generally the unemployed come from demographics that have very low participation rates, and so 47.3% is pretty unfeasible. In any case, even if we take these statistics to be true, around 1% of the people voting in the elections being unemployed would not justify extending the vote to minors.
It's just proportionate, you can also use this to say 47.3% of Scientologists voted in the election it's statistics. Also minor? Who decides what a minor is exactly?Why is it just an age it should be based on maturity or intelligence not how long you've lived.
that has nothing to do with statistics. you cannot just say, that if so and so percent of a population went voting, then its that percantage of the social group you are looking at, did vote. as it was said before the voting differs in social groups.
its as if i would say that 90% of party members went voting, so 90% of the population went voting. that doesnt work
Why is it just an age it should be based on maturity or intelligence not how long you've lived.
I can't speak for the U.S.A. as I'm not a resident, but in Canada when you register to vote, you are made elligible to be a jury member in a court trial. It's highly unlikely that *any* suspect would accept a young person as a 'eer' to judge them; additionally, I'm sure parents would object to their children who aren't even out of school yet having to sit, observe, and take part in a potentially bloody murder/rape trial.
If I was being tried, & was sat in front of a bunch of teenagers and adolescents I would demand a new jury.
