Image 01 Image 03

Nancy Pelosi: “I myself have always been for lowering the voting age to 16”

Nancy Pelosi: “I myself have always been for lowering the voting age to 16”

“it’s really important to capture kids when they’re in high school”^tfw

Last week, over 100 Democrats voted to lower the voting age to 16, and this week,House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said that she supports doing so because she thinks “it’s really important to capture kids when they’re in high school.”

The Hill reports:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) voiced her support on Thursday for lowering the federal voting age to 16, telling reporters during a press conference that doing so would be a boon to voter engagement in the U.S.

Pelosi said Thursday that lowering the voting age would drive interest in politics among younger Americans who are learning about the subject in high school. The Speaker said that changing the voting age to 16 would help drive a higher level of voter awareness and turnout.

“I myself have always been for lowering the voting age to 16,” Pelosi said. “I think it’s really important to capture kids when they’re in high school, when they’re interested in all of this, when they’re learning about government, to be able to vote.”

Capture kids?  I’m guessing she regrets that “gaffe.”


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



DieJustAsHappy | March 17, 2019 at 4:10 pm

What an unabashed position in an attempt to garner more Dems. Actually, the way things have been going lately, I’ve rather been of the opinion that the age need to be raised!

    It absolutely needs to be raised. The human brain has not fully developed the capacity for rational thought until around age 25.

      JusticeDelivered in reply to Paul. | March 17, 2019 at 8:38 pm

      Pelosi is an example of someone who had the reasoning capacity of a 16 year old at 25 years old, at which point she started to decline.

Only adults who actually pay taxes should be able to vote.

    fscarn in reply to Elric. | March 17, 2019 at 5:13 pm

    Because personal responsibility is the only measure by which genuine accountability can be gauged and giving overall stability to society, restricting the vote to those who have skin in the game is essential.

    The welfare class – call its members the takers – will always vote themselves a pay raise at the expense of the producers. They do that by voting in politicians who are forever promising “free stuff.” Always. Democrats are forever angling to expand the size of the welfare class, creating more and more dependent on government which in turn makes more and more punitive demands on the producers.

    As others have stated, increasing the voting age to 23 or 25 is the way to go. Making it 18 decades ago was foolhardy. And spare us the old “if they’re hold enough to carry a gun [for the Army] they’re old enough to vote.”

    If true, there are a lot of 12-15 year olds in Chicago, Philly, Baltimore, who are carrying guns. Nancy would give them the vote as well.

      tphillip in reply to fscarn. | March 17, 2019 at 6:45 pm

      “As others have stated, increasing the voting age to 23 or 25 is the way to go.”

      Yup. They should be sent to their deaths and have no say whatsoever in select the very people who can send them to their deaths.

      “And spare us the old “if they’re hold enough to carry a gun [for the Army] they’re old enough to vote.””

      That’s right! How dare they want to be able to choose people who would send them to their deaths? Why should they not gladly give their lives to their betters?

      I mean fscarn is obviously better than those whippersnappers and how dare any young person question the intellect and morals of such a paragon!

      Come comrade fscarn! Let us go get some vodka and show how generous we are being to these young, ignorant peasants!

        MarkS in reply to tphillip. | March 17, 2019 at 7:19 pm

        If you ever served you would know that once in the military you have nothing to say about who tells you to do whatever

          Elric in reply to MarkS. | March 17, 2019 at 8:06 pm

          The last time I checked, our military is all-volunteer.

          JusticeDelivered in reply to MarkS. | March 17, 2019 at 8:48 pm

          There are lots of people alive today where were subject to a mandatory draft, plenty of those drafted died or were maimed. Once in the military, when your CO suggested that you volunteer, you did.

        pfg in reply to tphillip. | March 17, 2019 at 8:14 pm

        The comment’s obvious point is that wisdom only comes with age and experience. Perhaps so obvious you missed it.

        txvet2 in reply to tphillip. | March 18, 2019 at 12:37 pm

        I agree, military volunteers should be an exception to an increased voting age. They tend to be far more conservative than the population in general, and they in fact DO have skin in the game. A lot of them even pay taxes.

    and I will AGAIN, as I have many times someone makes a blanket statement like this, ask am I not allowed to vote because I am a disabled vet? do you think my lifetime injuries are not enough payment for you?
    or will you suddenly make an exception for those like me?
    people need to smarten up and stop making blanket statements.
    solidify the age of adulthood and drive off that, 18, 21, 26, whatever.
    solidify adulthood age and everything from military joining to voting driven off that. that includes buying a beer or renting a car.
    stop making stupid blanket statements in anger people, because you will suddenly find yourself having to make exceptions.
    and exceptions suck when dealing with laws.
    again, advocate for one age of adulthood and drive everything off that

    fd10801 in reply to Elric. | March 18, 2019 at 3:47 am

    People who don’t pay taxes:
    Disabled people, including disabled vets
    Elderly people supported by their children
    Retired people with non-taxable pensions
    Trust fund recipients

    They should all be disenfranchised, right?

      txvet2 in reply to fd10801. | March 18, 2019 at 12:26 pm

      There are a lot of taxes other than income taxes.

        tom_swift in reply to txvet2. | March 18, 2019 at 9:24 pm

        But the personal income tax is the evil one. It’s the government’s excuse to keep a detailed file on you. Name, name changes, age, where you live, where you work, who you hire, what you own, what you buy, what you sell, how much money you have, where you keep it, who you support (children, infirm grandparents, etc), your leisure activities, religious or political donations, etc etc etc. The groundwork for the totalitarian state was laid in 1913; all we need is something like a President Sanders to push the last button and make it actually happen.

At this point, does anybody still think that Pelosi actually has the slightest idea of what she’s saying?

    alaskabob in reply to tom_swift. | March 17, 2019 at 4:27 pm

    Love to know who is on the Dem Central Committee. There has to be a cadre that coordinates things because when things go off script they really go off.

    alaskabob in reply to tom_swift. | March 17, 2019 at 4:33 pm

    Talking of going off script:

    The commissioner of the Human Rights Commission in Alaska and her buddy Chief Probation officer for the state caught using state property and web site to intimidate and berate truck owner over 2A bumper sticker.

    Of course she does!

    This is a corrupt, power hungry melalomaniac facist we’re talking about. She probably thinks she’s going to live forever, and she’ll destroy the nation for her own ego satisfaction. Same crap as hillary clinton.

    The movement should be to make the voting age 21: scare the crap out of people approaching 18 by telling them to look to the person next to them, and ask: do you want them choosing a ruler to govern you?

    Love your comments, Tom, but I don’t think Pelosi could be clearer: she wants to make people into involved citizens voting in every election from a young age. And, if those young voters just happen to vote Democratic in line with polling tendencies, that is simply a happy coincidence. It builds on decades of political work, much of which is the personal work of Hillary Clinton, famed child legal advocate. This combined with increases in both legal and illegal immigration, and legalizing illegal immigrants to quickly turn them into voting citizens, will generate a landscape where Republican victory is not only unlikely: it will become unthinkable.

    What, pray tell, is irrational about any of this? She knows exactly what she’s saying: this is how we will win, and keep winning – forever. It is one of the less insane initiatives currently coming from that party, but they still know exactly what they want: power, lots of it.

    MarkS in reply to tom_swift. | March 17, 2019 at 7:21 pm

    Yes she knows exactly what she’s saying, it called letting the cat out of the bag

As if we need any further evidence that our educational systems are little more than mass indoctrination centers, the Dems are looking to harvest the fruits of their labor at an earlier age. On the other hand, if the average teenager could be shown that Pelosi is looking to saddle them with a mountain of debt in the pursuit of higher education the outcome might not be what is expected.

Colonel Travis | March 17, 2019 at 4:45 pm

She’s always been a Biblical scholar, too.
What an honor to have this intellectual rock as our Speaker.

Of course, by the term “Capturing them in High School” is simply code for “we need to make sure those kids register and remain Democrat for life”. Team Moloch has already dumbed down the education industry while simultaneously indoctrinating entire generations that Conservatives are bad, Socialists are good. Miss Lube Rack of 1955 also knows Justice Democrats like Alexandria Vascio-Cortex, Rashida “Sharia is coming to America” Tlaib and Muslim Ilhan Omar want to capture the youngsters and convert them all to Justice Democrat Socialists.

Sadly for them it takes yet another Constitutional Amendment to lower the voting age and that likely won’t happen until at least 2024.

Funny, pelosi wants to kill children right after they’re born, but wants the surviving childrens’ votes at 16.

This is a sick, sick woman, leading a sick, sick political movement.

    The first rule of Pro-Choice ethics is that a baby classified as selective/cannibalized-child under the planned parenthood protocol must have her voice suppressed, her arms dismembered, and her head decapitated. Social progress cannot tolerate survivors of the wicked solution and hope to remain viable.

I’ve seen people describe this as a shadow movement to legalize pedophilia. Right now, with full “rights” at 18, age of consent varies by state between 16 and 18. By lowering voting to 16, these people would have an excuse to further legalize pedophilia by lowering consent ages even lower. No clue if its true, but the ends make sense.

    Of course it does!

    Pelosi wants absolut3e power – if she gets it by joining forces with pedophiles and their money, so be it.

    Look, pedophiles are people, too. People who should be skinned alive and sprayed with brine during the process. But people nonetheless.

Lower it to 14, why not?

-3 trimesters through an absentee vote, and end age discrimination, summary judgments, and cruel and unusual punishment for the sake of social progress.

Sorry … if an 18 year old can’t be trusted to own a Long Arm then 16 year olds don’t need to be voting!

healthguyfsu | March 17, 2019 at 5:39 pm

Kids are so smart these days aren’t they? All of that smart technology just proves it.

I mean it’s not like personal responsibility, maturity, and financial independence are trending away from earlier ages these days. Free everything for everyone will be so easy to scam in because every basic need is free for the vast majority at 16!

Meanwhile, in Illinois (a true Blue state), the age to buy cigarettes is being raised to 21. Apparently youngsters can’t be trusted to make good decisions about their health. Meanwhile, the Illinois legislature is planning to repeal a law requiring parental notification for minors seeking abortions.

So when is someone old enough to make adult decisions?

rabid wombat | March 17, 2019 at 5:43 pm

It should coincide with the age of majority. How do you explain 13 year olds paying adult prices at the movies, but cannot see adult movies? You can drive at 16, but cannot enter a contract. You can serve, buy a rifle or shotgun, at 18, but you cannot drink. At the age of majority, you should have all the rights, priveledges, responsibilities, and liabilities that come with the threshold.

Try to read this in “George Carlin” voice….

It’s really important that 16-year-olds should vote because, umm, because really we’d all like to be ruled by the whims of high-schoolers? Because adolescents just naturally have better judgement than adults? Because we should all aspire to the values of the Mean Girls Club?

I think she’s saying it’s important for 16-year-olds to vote because that would make 16-year-olds feel good. And perhaps it would, but would even they wish to live with the consequences?

Or perhaps she means there should also be an upper-age bound on voting, such as, perhaps, y’know, age 18.

No voting until you’re old enough to serve your country and/or you’re paying income taxes. Representation without taxation is almost as stupid an idea as taxation without representation.

    HarvardPhD in reply to UJ. | March 18, 2019 at 3:05 pm

    You’re old enough to serve your country at 18. But that is now entirely voluntary, and affects a smaller and smaller proportion of the population. It was a bad argument in 1975, and it is worse today.

Another Voice | March 17, 2019 at 6:47 pm

She can’t possibly believe what she is has to be a sound byte to get the attention of the press. Gads I hope it is!
Most kids, up until they’re the age of 24/25 (use to be 18/19) haven’t achieved critical thinking skills, haven’t have taken a semester of civic’s class. You only need watch a few “man on the street” interviews on current events or their knowledge of history that they are clueless. And then most of what you watch are in college. With tripe like this and the backing she gets from her party, gives one pause to believe why anyone in her party should be serving in any government position.

If you’re not old enough to buy a firearm, then you are not old enough to vote

If someone is young enough to be covered by their parent’s health insurance coverage, they are too young to vote.

Close The Fed | March 17, 2019 at 7:55 pm

For the life of me, I never understood why the GOPe didn’t fight TOOTH and NAIL to prevent Motor Voter from becoming law.

The GOPe is some kinda stupid.

If we were to lower the voting age to -3 months, 3rd trimester abortion would then be considered voter suppression.

More madness from the progressives. If it were possible, the voting age should be raised back to 21 or even 25.

The immaturity, lack of contact with real world problems, and disinterest in events which has characterized the college-age voting population clearly shows what a mistake it was to lower it to 18. Since the draft is no longer a factor in American life, the ‘old enough to fight, old enough to vote’ argument no longer carries any weight; it was always a non-sequitur anyway. Given the issues our country now faces, the old argument that one should be a property owner to vote should have additional weight, but this would admittedly make for too narrow a franchise.

I’ve always thought lowering the voting age to sixteen was a very bad idea. I teach high school, and a lot of my students seem to agree with me.

However, my faith in keeping the voting age at eighteen came in for a shock. I was teaching a government class to a bunch of immigrant kids, mostly Latin American. I was explaining what socialism was, and how it had been tried in several places. At that point, a student raised his hand, and I acknowledged him. “Oh. Do you think this is the reason why Venezuela is in such a mess?’ The kid asked.

Affirmative. At least a few of my sixteen-year-old students have more sense than some adults up in NYC!