Ann Coulter, who is part of a trifecta of evil speakers, will be at Berkeley this month, but right now, Ms. Coulter thinks it’s fine to rant away about how college students should not be able to vote.
On yesterday’s episode of the “Howie Carr Show,” Coulter vented about The Washington Post’s debunk of claims that massive voter fraud is taking place in New Hampshire; the Post found that many of the alleged fraud cases were actually out-of-state college students from casting legal ballots in New Hampshire.
Coulter first explained to Carr that she didn’t think students should be voting in states where they attend college if they don’t establish permanent residency in that state, but then said that it would be “outrageous” for a college student to change her residency to her college town.
Oh right, you can’t manage to refute the WP’s finding, and you can’t manage any reasonable response, so the answer is “college kids shouldn’t be able to vote! they are too stupid brainwashed!” So, Ms. Coulter, why do you think it’s worth your time speaking at colleges, if it’s not an attempt to radicalize young people into being mindless ragebigots? That is the point, right? After all, you and Bannon and Yiannopoulos aren’t going to Berkeley to whip up a nice froth of hate just to be followed by a “hey, kidding! you’re too young and dumb to matter, thanks for the money, bye.”
On the social level, where humans in general lag way behind in forward movement, things tend to get better with each new generation. Each new generation tends to be more thoughtful, more mindful, more accepting, and more involved in what’s happening in their various worlds. Me, I think that’s a good thing. Us older folks, we have to be careful our brains don’t rust shut while we weren’t listening. It’s important to keep our brains and our viewpoints exercised, and I would never once consider stripping young adults of their right to vote, ffs, that’s barbaric. And damn stupid. Not to say it can’t be a challenge, listening to young people, but y’know, you need to remember that enthusiasm you had long ago before life pounded you into the ground a thousand times.
Coulter then reached the conclusion that “college kids shouldn’t be voting” at all.
“It’s just to get the results of 13 years of Chinese-style brainwashing,” Coulter said. “I don’t think that people should be able to vote until they’re 30.”
Yeah. Could this be retroactive? After all, if you want to strip years of voting eligibility away from young people, then all the voting you did for that 12 years, well, those need to be taken away. Let’s have decades of recounts! Then we could just fuck all the rules, and put certain people in office, or back in office, for periods of time. Fun, right? Calling this nonsense stupid is an understatement. Of course, given that Ms. Coulter is over 30, that makes things very convenient for her, doesn’t it?
Via RWW.
I presume she has no problems with allowing the not-allowed-to-vote-unders-30s from, say, been drafted and shot.
Also, pro tip: The minimum age for the House is 25yo, so you’d have the weird situation of people writing & voting on laws whilst not being allowed to vote.
Blf, oh please, that would mean Ms. Coulter actually had to think! The horror of it all.
Didn’t Coulter once get caught voting in the wrong district?
No idea, but it wouldn’t surprise me.
Joseph Zowghi@3, She has been accused of it several times and investigated at least once; no charges or convictions, as far as I am aware.
over 30?
That rings a bell…
.
We could also make people stop voting after the age of … what?
65?
part of a trifecta of evil speakers
Whoah -- like an Axis of Evil?
As someone over 50, I think we should revive the 60’s cry “don’t trust anyone over 30!”
I think a necessary step is to stop calling the “college kids”. It’S such a weird phrase that certainly has no equivalent in German. It’s a bit like calling grown ass women “girls”: it infantilises them and makes it easier to dismiss their opinions.
Marcus:
I think Coulter, Bannon and Yiannopoulos qualify, yes?
As someone who will be waving “bye!” to the 5th decade in a couple of months, I agree.
Giliell:
Oh gods, I could not agree more. It’s ridiculous. The concept of adulthood in uStates is an absurd one, complicated by individual state laws. Sure, 18, you can join the military, you can vote, but you better not drink, you’re just a kid! And so on. And you certainly have to watch who on earth you sleep with when young, too. The laws in that regard, oh man. A mess.
Hey, you can conduct a potentially lethal 2 tons f steel at 16 and own murder totally not-weapons much earlier, but no beer.
Caine@#10:
I think Coulter, Bannon and Yiannopoulos qualify, yes?
I agree! Roll back the silo doors.
Maybe it’s my ESL, but I was assuming from “college kids” that “kids” can include young adults.
I will seriously question if 18 is old enough to vote, though. I was an ignorant moron at that age, mainly echoing the opinions of my parents and not my own. It took me until I was 24 to really start forming my own views.
One view of my father’s I do still share, though, is if one isn’t viewed responsible enough to drink until they are 21, then they aren’t responsible enough to vote or, most importantly, to decide to join the military. He was very opinionated that the voting age, drinking age, and age one can join the service all needed to be the same.
Leo @ 14:
You aren’t everyone. I was out of the house and in college at 17. *shrug* Everyone is different, but if you are legally an adult at 18, then you have the right to vote, and that’s the way it should be. I’m all for young people voting. For every generation, they end up with the mantle of responsibility for the next and so on. That’s how we work. It does no good to extend every one’s childhood to 25 or 30, that’s utter nonsense. Life is fucking short, and by 30, you’ve eaten up a good deal of it.
I can’t wait to hear those three Free Speech Absolutists to denounce the White House for demanding that ESPN fire Jemele Hill after she called Donald a white supremacist! It’s going to be like an old time revival at Berkeley as they rise up in one voice to defend the freedom of a woman of colour to speak without losing her job!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/09/13/white-house-espns-jemele-hill-should-be-fired-for-calling-trump-a-white-supremacist/?utm_term=.a1051a5187c4
Absolutely Caine, I cast my first vote at eighteen in the election Thatcher (spit) won to become PM, and I voted Labour, which neither of my parents did, but I had read the Guadian for several years by then as well as listening to my older brothers and I knew the Tories were bad news for most people in the UK. And in terms of dealig with the shit older people pass down British young adults voted overwhelmingly to Remain, but they are going to be the ones who have to deal with the mess their elders voted for.
Given the horrific political opinions of many 60+ people, to even have a discussion about how immature young voters are seems a bit laughable. Give me immature over “frightened and set in my ways” oldsters. And I am much closer to “oldster” status than “yout”
Plenty of people are ignorant morons their whole lives. We still let them vote.
Pro tip to those suggesting a maximum voting age: There is no maximum age for the House, Senate, or President, so the situation postulated in @1 would also occur: People writing & voting-on (or signing / vetoing) laws whilst not being eligible to vote.† It was pointed out in @2 that avoiding this would require people to think…
† As a practical matter, since most elected politicians at the federal level are older, it is very probably more likely there would be voting-ineligible elderly politicians than younger politicians.
Not much different from most people 20 years older. Yes, most people are a special kind of idiot at 18. Yes, I wished i knew half the things I believed I knew at 18. But that doesn’t make them stupid or uninformed and especially not deserving to be deprived of the right to have a say in their future.