Personally, I think it's a good thing that the people who have the least life experience and are least likely to follow politics closely are also the least likely to vote. Why do we want the ignoramuses deciding the fate of the nation?

I just turned 32, and I don't trust the judgement of most of the people my age as much as I do the over 40 crowd.

Of course, it weren't for the morons, your party would be SOL.

The morons voted for Bush because he told them if Gore got in gas would end up costing two bucks a gallon.

But the best part of screwing morons is, THEY FORGET!

Reagan was gonna give them school prayer, Bush was gonna give them vouchers, now what are you promising them this time? THE SAME SHIT ALL OVER AGAIN! BRILLIANT!

Because we can trust people with the most life experience to pick the most qualified candidate for President?

Are you saying that everyone under 30 cannot have an informed opinion? I watch 2-3 hours of political commentary on week nights and the Sunday morning politics shows); read 3 major newspapers online everyday; looked at both candidates websites; and voted during the primary and midterm elections. I'm under 30 married, have a steady job and have a kid on the way. How much life experience do I need to be able to make an informed opinion.

So at 18 a person can make a decision to fight (and possibly die) for their country, but they are incapable of making an informed decision of who the leader of their country is?

Riiiight! Because older people are, by default, more informed! C'mon! We're extremely lucky in this country if voters are even single-issue voters instead of just voting straight party lines. In my opinion, the vast majority of people make their voting decision with that most reptilian part of their brain that also governs the "fight or flight" response and instantly determines if they are attracted to someone. Don't kid yourselves, for a great many people it really is just a popularity/beauty contest in the end:-(

By definition, over half the population is of below average intelligence, and we can probably all agree that the average is not very high to begin with.

Personally, I would rather trust my country to college-educated young people, regardless of how they vote, to older people who have never developed good analytical skills. I would prefer young people get their news off the internet, even from U-Tube, than over the back fence from their neighbor. At least the internet presents different perspectives, not likely from your small town neighbor.

[The morons voted for Bush because he told them if Gore got in gas would end up costing two bucks a gallon.]

Okay, let's see . . . Bush ran for office in 1999 promising to work to open ANWR and the East and West coasts to drilling. He was defeated on this proposal by special interest groups. Now today gas is $4 a gallon. So, since none of his oil policy plans got enacted, tell me again how the price of gas is his fault?

[Reagan was gonna give them school prayer, Bush was gonna give them vouchers, now what are you promising them this time? THE SAME SHIT ALL OVER AGAIN! BRILLIANT!]

It certainly wasn't the fault of Reagan or Bush that we don't have these things.

kcperlas:

Because we can trust people with the most life experience to pick the most qualified candidate for President?

Are you saying that everyone under 30 cannot have an informed opinion? I watch 2-3 hours of political commentary on week nights and the Sunday morning politics shows); read 3 major newspapers online everyday; looked at both candidates websites; and voted during the primary and midterm elections. I'm under 30 married, have a steady job and have a kid on the way. How much life experience do I need to be able to make an informed opinion.

So at 18 a person can make a decision to fight (and possibly die) for their country, but they are incapable of making an informed decision of who the leader of their country is?

No. All I'm saying is that you are rare in your demographic. If you need "P Diddy" to get out your vote, the country would be better off if you stayed home. That does not sound like if describes you, but it certainly describes too many people in our demographic.

entj4sure:

Personally, I would rather trust my country to college-educated young people, regardless of how they vote, to older people who have never developed good analytical skills. I would prefer young people get their news off the internet, even from U-Tube, than over the back fence from their neighbor. At least the internet presents different perspectives, not likely from your small town neighbor.

The problem with this is your assumption that a college education endows a person with analytical skills. This is, unfortunately, not supported by the evidence.

It isn't their fault that they promise to deliver things they know they can't?

Why don't the promise anti-gravity machines and free beer for life, while they're at it? Politicians always promise more than they can deliver, but what slays me about the republicans is it's always the same stuff, and yet the idiots who vote for them fall for it again and again and again and again...

McCain is campaigning against earmarks. he is pretending that earmarks are a big fiscal problem for the US Government. Last year, earmarks totaled $ 16 billion. That's a lotta wampum, but it's nothing compared to the clost of Bush's vanity war, or the even stupider and more useless Nuclear Umbrella That Does Not Work (aka Star Wars).

So since these earmarks mostly pay for local infrastructure or building projects (which is to say, stuff we need) and otherwise McCain and his party would otherwise piss it down a rathole someplace in one of their moments of military adventurism, I'd say the earmarks are a TREMENDOUS ECONOMY.

But dont tell that to teh Screaming Munchkin -- he's off now, sliming Obama with some bizarre sex education "scandal" he got from Alan Keyes. Great campaign you guys got going -- it's the insane leading the stupid.

much of the over 40 crowd isn't too swift either.

I bet you're a lot of fun at parties.

oxboggle:

Politicians always promise more than they can deliver, but what slays me about the republicans is it's always the same stuff, and yet the idiots who vote for them fall for it again and again and again and again...

LOL, and what "new and unique" things are the Democrats proposing?

I'll wait around for this one, perhaps they are now pushing the pro-life agenda or prayer in schools or something I've missed.

Or maybe, and I'm not saying you're wrong here or anything, but MAYBE they are preaching the same things they always do as well?

oxboggle:

It isn't their fault that they promise to deliver things they know they can't? Why don't the promise anti-gravity machines and free beer for life, while they're at it? Politicians always promise more than they can deliver, but what slays me about the republicans is it's always the same stuff, and yet the idiots who vote for them fall for it again and again and again and again...

Well, it's one thing to promise offshore drilling and get opposed by other politicians. That doesn't mean offshore drilling is physically impossible. Looks like we might very well be getting it soon now.