• @rockSlayer
    link
    762 months ago

    I don’t agree that they should abstain, but as the saying goes:

    Don’t interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake.

  • @thallamabond
    link
    562 months ago

    “What are they going to do, protest?” …this guy probably

    Also just want to point out this is just a great example of incremental fascism

  • DigitalTraveler42
    link
    English
    292 months ago

    I love how every guy Trump backs is a complete asshole who says and does complete asshole shit.

  • Granbo's Holy Hotrod
    link
    282 months ago

    He is making the case that nursing homes had 100% participation in some cases, and there is suspicion that the staff directed them, or maybe some third party gathered them and filled them out themselves. I would love to see the proof of that. It could also be that old people in nursing homes have nothing happening and the staff supported as an activity to keep them active and …well…it is their right. Could there be an example of someone who actually broke the law and straight up filled out ballots for incapacitated elderly…prosecute that MF’r.

    • @frickineh
      link
      252 months ago

      I work in municipal government and we have the busiest ballot box in the county outside my office, and I can vouch that old people fucking love to vote. All day long on election day and the days leading up to it, it’s a line of people, many of whom who probably shouldn’t be driving, waiting to drop off their ballot. They take it super seriously. I wish everybody was as hyped to vote as the elderly.

    • @jeffwOP
      link
      132 months ago

      Glad someone finally said they support their right to vote lol. The thing about nursing homes is that they often have targeted efforts to help people vote, since they often struggle to get to the polls. This can be an internal effort or an external one, from a partisan group or a voting advocacy group.

      • @CharlesDarwin
        link
        English
        22 months ago

        I lived in an area where one of the voting locations was actually in a retirement home.

        • @jeffwOP
          link
          22 months ago

          Yeah, I’ve seen that too

    • FenrirIII
      link
      72 months ago

      That and gerrymandering

  • kora
    link
    fedilink
    242 months ago

    Given the older population’s proclivity to vote against the best interests of the next generations in hopes of finally lucking into that American Dream…

    Sure, but lets just set a cap not dependent on housing situation.

    • @EdibleFriend
      link
      20
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I don’t agree they shouldn’t but…I mean…yeah I wont bitch if all the fucking boomers sit this one out.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    22 months ago

    To be fair, they should vote. I may not like their vote, but it’s their right to do so, and a matter of civic duty.

  • @CharlesDarwin
    link
    English
    22 months ago

    What’s next, the cons start dunking on Faux watchers, too? Average age of Faux watcher is how far from average nursing home resident?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -72 months ago

    I generally agree. I think it’s reasonable to restrict young children from voting (though I think we should lower the voting age to 16) because they aren’t mentally prepared for the implications of voting. I also think that at a certain point old people start losing those capabilities and also shouldn’t vote. On the upper end its going to widely vary so I don’t think there’s a reasonable way to formulate a just exclusion criteria… but I agree with the general principle.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      32 months ago

      I don’t think a 16 year old is not mentally prepared. It’s more that they are still mostly brainwashed by their parents, churches and a general desire to fit into a “team”. Fuck, maybe we shouldn’t the average American vote. Lol.

    • @CharlesDarwin
      link
      English
      12 months ago

      Given how we keep coasting along on ancient stupid laws (or even resurrecting them in certain cases - cough AZ cough ), I don’t think it’d be wise to start instituting short-sighted age-related laws, in the event that life extension starts to rear its head in ways that start quickly invalidating expectations of the past. The only way something like this might make sense is if it there is an objective way to actually measure cognitive ability.

      Though I bet cons would fight this tooth and nail, because I have a feeling a lot of their voters and candidates might not pass such tests…

      • @CharlesDarwin
        link
        English
        1
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Yeah, I could think of all kinds of ways to rationalize invalidating various age ranges based on stereotypes with a given age range. 18-25? They might be too busy with education to be informed of politics to actually vote responsibly. 25-30? Possibly still living with their parents, and don’t have their own house or they are raising small children, and/or trying to start that corporate ladder climbing, so no time to be informed. 30-55? Too busy trying to bust their asses to pay off student debt and support older children, still no time to be informed. 55-70, kids boomeranged home because housing is so expensive, maybe even still paying student loans in addition to trying to help out with their kids’ student loans, and so still working/came out of retirement to try to keep a roof over everyone’s heads. Probably consuming total nonsense uber-far-right nonsense like Faux and OAN and hate radio in the car, or just merely slightly right wing corporate outlets like MSNBC, so they cannot have the vote, either. 70 and up - probably run out of the workforce by that time and so if you ain’t working, you don’t matter any more…