JD Vance puts his cast iron in the dishwasher pass it on
Jorkin Dapenis Vance uses sugar substitute in his sweet tea. Pass it on.
Jelly Donut Vance puts the toilet paper on the far side of the holder, and doesn't have pets. Pass it on.
Jorts Dangler Vance has a secret humiliation fetish, pass it on.
Jerkin' Dongs Vance applied the eyeliner to his butthole first, then his eyes, p[ass it on.
James David’s face when you call him Jorkin Dapenis
Just A. Dipshit Vance after getting bedbugs from that couch sitting on the corner.
“Who gets the extra votes if there’s an odd number of kids and/or the parents are estranged or have opposing views?”
That’s the beauty. The husband, as the head of the family, gets the children’s votes—and his wife’s as well. Also, from now on, her name is “Mrs. “ followed by his name.
I’m sure Vance meant to explain this detail but somehow got sidetracked.
I’m sure Vance meant to explain this detail but somehow got sidetracked.
There was a stuffed loveseat nearby.
I’m sure you meant, “A yet to be stuffed loveseat nearby”
If we’re going through with this fictitious scenario, using the same logic of childless adults not having the same investment in the future, everyone over the age of 70 should no longer be able to vote for the same reasons.
Something tells me that would help Democrats even more.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
What age and why?
Every minute Vance is spouting dumb shit rather than policy is a good minute for Harris-Walz.
That's the neat thing. The policy is also dumb shit.
The answer is still no.
What age?
This is great reporting and all, but don't show this to a White Supremacist because they're going to run the complete opposite direction with this data.
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News