16 To Vote? What Are The Democrats Thinking?
What were you doing at 16? Was politics a concern of yours? Sure was not mine? At 16 I was a randy boy who could care less about politics, if a girl would have told me she was a Democrat, flashed her eyes at me, I would have RAN for the booth to vote Democrat, that is how little I was concerned about politics.
The whole problem with the left is they are losing votes, thus they are now talking about a host of things. First, they want to do away with the electoral college. I find this interesting, people like Elizabeth Warren claim this is to give a voice to all votes, but that is a deception, if this would be done, the East Coast and California would control the elections, no more would the Mid-West have any influence over the election. One has to look at what would be done, not what these snake oil salespeople have to say.
We now have a compact of liberal states that have pledged to not honor their electoral college laws, rather if they find a national vote is a win for one candidate or another, they will instruct their candidates to vote for that candidate, even if they did not win their state votes. This is known as the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC). I am waiting for this to be challenged by the federal government, while a state has a right to assign their electoral votes, I am not sure it would pass the high court with them deciding they have a right to ignore their state votes in favor of the nationwide votes.
Next, they are moving to pack the Supreme Court. And why are they doing this? They know with the two Supreme Court Justices that Trump has appointed the court has swung more to the right, if Trump gets another term, the threat to their agenda increases with Associate Justice Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg who are both in their 80’s (Breyer (80), Ginsburg (85)), Ginsburg’s health in question with her continuing to go back for treatment for cancer, again and again, we see what could be two vacancies opening in the highest court.
The Democrats have for years now used the courts to achieve what they could not with a vote they would get through the courts (Roe v Wade, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, Obergefell v. Hodges ), in each of these the court took what should have been an issue of states rights, used the right to privacy to pass Roe v Wade, Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to pass Obergefell v. Hodges, and the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as a means to discriminate against a white person that was well qualified to enter medical school, rather was discriminated against so as to meet racial quota’s.
What needs to be understood, I may have 100% supported the decision of the court, but still be against the court’s reason, the problem was the federal court has been since the civil war pushing state responsibility more and more on the federal government. What is more, rather than use the law to decide the case, they used a constitutional right that had little to do with the case to decide the case. A great example is Roe v. Wade, they used the right to privacy to say that a mothers decision to end a pregnancy took precedence over the right of the unborn.
I need to expand a little more on this to have what I am saying understood. The court ignored the rights of the unborn in this case, but states had not. A woman could be arrested for child abuse or endangerment for drinking or doing drugs while pregnant, could be charged, but then upon her release from jail go visit an abortion clinic, terminate the pregnancy, and that under federal law is protected, yet which one was more an act of abuse?
Sadly states that are far left on the political spectrum, now to protect their right to abortion have stopped all protection of the unborn, least such laws infringe on the right to abort the child. Most states make it illegal to kill a child, they will charge with first-degree homicide, but New York has conflicting laws that make it impossible to charge. So if you don’t want your girlfriend/wife/friend to be pregnant with your child, you can assault her with the intent to kill the child, you will get charged with assault on her, but the murder of a child will not be charged.
But back to 16, as we can see, on the State level and the Federal level the Democrats desperately want to bring new voters in. They know they can’t get illegals to vote, there is no way the courts can let this be, some states promise to watch the voting, like California, then tell illegals they can partake in local elections, but how many of these are checked to make sure they are not partaking in federal?
Bringing in 16-year-olds is just another push by the left to gain what they can’t now through popular vote. The reason for the age drop has nothing to do with giving these children an election, rather the fact that the younger the age, the more likely you will be a liberal or have liberal leanings. Most adults over 40 who are now conservative were far more liberal in thought during their teenage wold; it is when you engage with the real world you see how unrealistic liberal ideology is, many that were once liberal turn conservative in this age group.
We see from the chart as soon as a teen reaches 30 the conservatives far outnumber the liberals, this number climbs as you go up in age. Now think how this would look if you added 16’s and 17-year-olds, you would most likely see the liberals finally outnumber the conservatives.
The reason the Democrats are going after 16-year-old voters, they know after college the drop off of liberal voters starts to drop, and do so in a rapid fashion, they need to grab the younger community, it will then keep them in their fold for 7 to 8 years of voting rather than 5 to 6 years.
As we can see 16 is not about the giving rights to this group, simply put, they are children, have no idea of how to research responsibly and formate their own opinions, the reason the Democrats are so desperate to include these people and illegals, they are losing American voters on a national front, adding 16-year-olds will just hold off this decline.