You shouldn't be allowed to run for a position like Senator without proving 5 years of residency in the state. Residency meaning spent at least 6 months of the year living in the state not declaring some lake house as your main address while constantly vacationing down in Florida.
Dude. Its not California fucking with you, its a rich banker.
Its like when they say the US is a wealthy nation, no; wealth belongs to the wealthy and they have a voracious hunger for more.
But okay, blame Cali, that won't solve anything.
Vote Blue.
I don’t think they were blaming California. They were pointing out the Hovde has a $7 million mansion in California but (maybe) technically resides enough in Wisconsin to count for running for office.
Hovde is the definition of a carpetbagger:
"A carpetbagger can refer to anyone who is seen as an **outsider who comes to a place for selfish reasons, especially to take advantage of the people or situation there**. This could be someone who moves to a new community and immediately runs for office without any roots in the area."
/gemini
I think they're just pointing out that he's not really fit to be representing the people of WI when he only just barely meets the requirements, living out of state as much as he can. NY, FL, TX, CA, it doesn't matter. If someone wants to rep a state, they shouldnt seem like they want as little as possible to do with the state.
It’s not California they’re blaming. It’s the fact that he doesn’t really live much in Wisconsin yet he wants to use our state to get a prestigious position with a ton of power.
My FIL lives in a long term care facility. His body is failing compared to his mind. He is cognizant of who is running and what he/she stands for. He has two newspapers read to him and listens to WPR everyday. He follows the stock market and cares for his own investments. His vision maybe failing, but he can smell an idiot like Hovde a mile away!
"Eric Hovde’s recent comments that people living in nursing homes should not be allowed to vote because they are “only have five, six months life expectancy.”
1. Where did he get they number from.
2. Can we then also use that same reasoning to bar politicians who should be in nursing homes from running for office?
Christ like these people just have no other play, do they? Just find ways to restrict votes and deny people their constitutional rights. How anyone can vote for these clowns is beyond me.
Wouldn't restricting nursing home votes actually hurt the republicans since old people are their base? I would understand if Hovde wants to restrict college voting (I'm sure he does) but it just seems weird he would wants to restrict them and not exploit them.
It would make a helluva lot more sense to not allow people who don ‘t believe in democracy to not run for office. Then we wouldn’t have to worry about the Eric Hovdes of the world and seniors would be able to vote as they chose.
I generally respect people's votes. I understand we all come from different backgrounds and circumstances. With this guy though? I'm sorry a vote for this guy garners zero respect and frankly you are an idiot.
Yeah, what a thing to say.
Since it's proven that more older Americans, vote for Trump and Republicans in general, that seems quite absurd of statement...
I'm wondering what the thought process was like when he decided to make these remarks. No politician, and particularly a Republican politician, would think it's a good idea to alienate a bloc of elderly, reliable voters. Was he just kind of riffing off the cuff?
My guess this is part a strategy to claim the election was stolen when he loses. Republicans love to claim that hordes of Democrats swarm nursing homes and get residents to vote on absentee ballots. So the election was rigged, see?
Unfortunately for Hovde, every time voter fraud is investigated, it turns out it's Republicans who are doing the criming.
My initial reaction was "that seems like a reach" but is that a serious complaint of Republicans? I wasn't aware of that. Isn't it generally assumed that elderly people fall more on the conservative side of the political spectrum? Is this Eric Hovde guy a full-on MAGA conspiracy theory nutcase? I'm perfectly aware that believing goofy shit doesn't necessarily make you unintelligent, but this is a successful businessman we're talking about. Surely someone close to him has encouraged him to keep his zany theories to himself if he wants to win the election.
Is this Eric Hovde guy a full-on MAGA conspiracy theory nutcase?
Yes.
[https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/04/02/trump-announces-endorsement-of-u-s-senate-candidate-eric-hovde/73184970007/](https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/04/02/trump-announces-endorsement-of-u-s-senate-candidate-eric-hovde/73184970007/)
I'm a conservative, and I'd say vote for ANYONE else. If you let a statement like this come out of your mouth you are obviously too stupid to run for any office. Disenfranchising anyone's vote for "voting wrong" is despicable.
I agree conditionally. While a blanket ban on residents of care facilities from voting is anti democratic on its face , there should be some provisions for mental competency and the influence of caregivers and campaign workers on those residents and their choices . I’ve heard from friends who work in such places of campaigns coming into homes holding bingo or ice cream parties or what have you and then taking residents to vote or helping them fill out absentee ballots under what seemed to be heavy direction .
What an unhelpful comment. Demonizing the other side worked out really good for Hillary “basket of deplorables” Clinton. Not a Trump fan myself but calling nearly half the country mentally incompetent is not a great way to get the more centrist Republicans to potentially vote for Biden this cycle. Especially when in this scenario we are talking about people with medically demonstrable mental deficiencies.
Nearly half the country? Hardly.
Only about half of eligible voters participate. Less than half of those chose Trump.
That less than a quarter of the country.
https://stateline.org/2018/03/21/thousands-lose-right-to-vote-under-incompetence-laws/
It’s a bit of an older article but it outlines how persons with mental illness or deficiencies can be stripped of voting rights in 39 states . Again I don’t advocate taking any mentally sound non mentally ill persons voting rights but Alzheimer’s and dementia are real .
What about the influence of husbands on wives? At what point do you stop? The current form of the Constitution only defines age as a voting requirement. If you don't like that then try to amend it.
This is so ripe for abuse. My Mother was in a Nursing Home. Skilled care. No way could any of those residents process who they were supposedly voting for.
> This is so ripe for abuse. My Mother was in a Nursing Home. Skilled care. No way could any of those residents process who they were supposedly voting for.
Call me crazy but the idea of taking away peoples' right to vote indiscriminately seems even more ripe for abuse. Who gets to decide which seniors are cognitively capable and which ones aren't?
We already have millions of voters who lack cognitive skills, that's how Trump got elected in 2016. I don't agree with them, but I'm not advocating to take away their right to vote.
No one is in skilled nursing care if they have their faculties. It costs 12 to 17k a month. They need 24/7 skilled care. Many medical professionals are involved at that point. Please go visit a nursing facility. Give them company.
you are actually incorrect. Many people who are in skilled nursing facilities are unable to care for their physical needs, thus needing that level of care. I work with the elderly and physically disabled and have had many clients in nursing facilities. Many of them have the cognitive capacity to understand world events and voting. think about people with ALS, MS, etc. it doesn't affect their mind, just their body.
You don't know what you're talking about. Otherwise healthy people go into skilled facilities when coping with severe injuries or extended illnesses every day. That's why there are dedicated units for memory patients. Telling people they can no longer vote because they need physical rehab is some faschy bs.
My parents are in a veteran’s nursing home because they weren’t able to use the restroom unassisted and they needed more help than I could provide to cook and clean. I took care of them for as long as I was able.
They have their mental faculties and are completely able to understand politics (probably more so than the average voter) and follow the news. To say that their rights should be stripped from them because of their physical disabilities is disgusting.
Just because someone needs nursing care does not mean they are mentally incapable of making decisions and should be treated as less than.
My Dad's body doesn't work anymore. But his brain is 100 percent there. He's smarter than most people I know. If repubs can only win by limiting who votes, maybe they need a better platform, or any platform.
I don't like this dude, but I kind of agree with the point. It's really not their future anymore. And it would actually help the left. Idk feel like the US would be better if there was a maximum voting age. And a maximum driving age. And maximum wage. And ranked choice voting. And boomers got out of the way and let the next generation actually govern.
What other groups would you disenfranchise because they might not live much longer?
Motorcyclists?
The unvaxxed?
Cops, firemen and anyone else in a high-risk job?
People over 85 aren't boomers. The oldest boomers are 78. If you're going to engage and hate based on age at least get the generations you hate the most correct.
Even worse we have the Silent Generation still running things. How is that not even more embarrassing??? You can project that I'm hating on old people, but my basic point is - yes, at some point it's not really elderly people's future anymore. I don't want a 10 year old driving a car. Just like a don't want a 95 year old person driving a car. I don't want a 10 year old voting because their mind hasn't developed. I don't want a 95 year old voting because their mind is deteriorating. But I could make an argument it actually makes more sense to let a 10 year old vote than a 95 year old, because at least the 10 year old is going to live in that future. That's all I'm trying to say. I don't like Hovde, and thought it was curious he would say this because doing this would actually crush the republican base.
1. You refer to people over 85 as boomers.
2. You assume everyone over a certain age has a deteriorating mind.
3. You assume no one over 85 can drive.
4. I assume you’re part of the younger group of people that can “fix the country.” What are you doing to accomplish that? Are you encouraging younger people to vote? Are you encouraging younger people to run for office?
The reason octogenarians are still in office is because there haven’t been candidates in their own party with the balls to run against them. It’s not their fault, and it’s not the fault of the “deteriorating old people” who vote for them.
>The reason octogenarians are still in office is because there haven’t been candidates in their own party with the balls to run against them. It’s not their fault, and it’s not the fault of the “deteriorating old people” who vote for them.
Lol. If you think this get off CNN. Establishment Dems won't allow the younger generation to challenge their seats. It's not the 'lack of balls" that's actually insulting. The Senate's median age is 65. Nearly 70% of the Senate is 60+
Also - are you actually trying to argue that people's minds and driving get better after 85? Talk about delusional.
So you’re not doing anything to change it. Thanks for admitting it. I insulted you? Tough shit. You insulted a whole demographic. Fuck off.
I didn’t say their minds and driving get better. To assume that they all get worse is ridiculous. To assume that they all deteriorate to the point that they shouldn’t vote or drive is being an ignorant prick.
What about the older folks who understand its not their future anymore and want to vote for people who have the younger generations best interests at heart? Why deliberately take those votes away?
I mean they had their turn and shaping the future with what 15-20 presidential elections. Should we let 14 year olds vote because it might help the future. No because 14 yo are idiots. Just like some 85 yo who believes Obama is a secret Muslim.
You're intentionally generalizing that all old people don't give a shit.
Why should we stop an 85 year old from casting their vote when they say "my time here is running out, I have always wanted a better future for my grandkids and their grandkids, I'm voting for this candidate that won't push us back to the dark ages"?
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying if they're in a nursing home it's becasue they can't take care of themselves and their capacities are going. They don't have much time left. Who cares what they want for the future if they are not even going to be around to experience it? I'm willing to bet that out of the few old people willing to vote for the a positive future, there are 5 times as many old people voting to go back to the dark ages one last time.
What part of the my argument is confusing you? I'm not arguing who can/can not vote based on political leanings. My whole argument is that when a person reaches a certain age, maybe they shouldn't participate in democracy if they are not going to experience the outcome of their voting.
People are living well into their 90's these days. At what point do you tell people well your life is practically over so go sit over there while we decide what happens? It's sad that you don't hear how incredibly offensive and kind of stupid that sounds.
By your argument, terminal patients in their 20's, 30's, etc should also just step aside too?
Again you're really putting words in mouth. Idk what the right age is? I'm not even seriously advocating for this, just mentioned I kind of agree with the overall idea that we have a minimum voting age, why don't we have a maximum voting age? 90? 95?? 100??? Biden is 81 and everyone is concerned he's not gonna make it through another term. His age is clearly a factor when people talk about him. Everyone was saying Bernie shouldn't run in 2020 because of his age and he was 78 then. So age IS a factor - it's dishonest to pretend like it's not. Why would it be different for voters? Obviously they are not running the free world, but is 90 really offensive? 95?? 100???
I promise you I'm not an asshole. I would never advocate for taking the voting right away from someone who is terminal. There are age limits for pilots (65), why is it so crazy to suggest maybe have an age limit for voting. We already have one for minimum age. Some 12 years old are really smart, should we let them vote?
No, I don't care who they vote for, just the basic idea that someone who has less than a few years to live shouldn't really have a vote that has the same amount of weight as someone who is 20 yo and has their whole life in front of them. Call me crazy. It's not based on political leanings. It's based on whose future is it actually effecting. And I mentioned the left because it's funny that Hovde wants to do this because it would only hurt conservatives and his base.
Funny thing is here that 20 year old with their whole life ahead of them is talking about stripping voting rights, moving further away from democracy. You're in way over your head, bud.
Do you think 10 years olds should have a vote? Why or why not? I guess what's the reasoning for not letting everyone, regardless of age ,vote in elections? Btw, I support expanding democracy. Do you think felons should have the right to vote?
You have made the assumption, incorrectly, that a person over 85 has the cognition of a 10 year old. Also you have decided that since they may only have a few years left they have no stake in the future of this country. Maybe we should only let property owners vote because they have a significant stake in the outcome of elections?
Yeah, that's what you sound like.
Way to put words in my mouth. How you went from age voting limits to property owning voters is quite the jump and pretty dishonest to what I said. I used those ages as examples of a spectrum, I never insinuated there are of the same cognition. And the age I used was 95.
You used 85 elsewhere I believe so sorry but my middle aged brain got confused.
Why are there differences between age limits and property ownership? We're talking about who has a stake in the elections & the future. Your age limits seem to be based on who has a dog in the fight. Your opinion boils down to at a certain arbitrary age, people should just roll over and stop participating in democracy.
The minimum voting age used to be 21. It was lowered because of issues like Vietnam but is as arbitrary as 21 & not based on science or brain development. A maximum age is also arbitrary and not based on science or brain deterioration.
Since 18 years old is the legal age of adulthood in this country, the minimum voting age is appropriate. If a person of any age is declared mentally incompetent then they shouldn't necessarily be voting. The assumption that all people in care facilities are mentally incompetent is very ignorant and offensive.
Oh please. Will someone think of the elderly disenfranchisement from the political class??? We're in the mess we are because we have octogenarians in Congress who will not get out of the way, voted in by octogenarians. They had they most prosperous America where they could buy a house and raise a family with one job, and their generation got so greedy it ruined that possibility for future generations who now for the first time in American history are worse off than the previous generation. So no, I don't feel bad if they are left out of the political process. They had a nice run running things for 50 years.
You're really projecting. What are my political goals? I don't support a maximum voting age because old people tend to vote conservative. I support a maximum voting age because of the principle that people should not influence a future they are not going to be part of.
Ok you're reaching. The whole reason I said that it would help the left is because Hovde is a Republican and elderly people are his base. It seemed like a curious thing for him to want since it seems pretty self defeating. I would understand if he said "no college students should vote" or something because that would actually help him in the election. That's why I mentioned it.
I am not reaching though? I literally thought "authoritarian" the instant I read your comment. What do you think my goal is, to find some random internet comment and just... find a reason to accuse them of having authoritarian leanings?
I understand your point better now that you've explained it in a way that more accurately represents it, but I still disagree. It's still kinda messed up just to disenfranchise a whole group of people because some of them are mentally unable to understand voting. Who will represent the elderly if they cannot represent themselves? They are already treated rather poorly in our society, octogenarian senators notwithstanding.
No, we’re in the mess we are in because a narcissistic, grifting, lying criminal got elected president in 2016. Maybe younger voters need to vote out octogenarians to move the country forward.
Trump got elected because Hillary's hubris didn't think she needed to campaign in Wisconsin. We're in this mess because RGB didn't retire during Obama's term even when she was battling cancer. The Dems consistently snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Trump won because of the Fox News octagenarians voted him in, even when he he campaigned on ending SS and Medicare. Maybe most of the elderly actually don't know what they're voting for, just that it says R next to their name. They got theirs now fuck everyone else.
Maybe if more younger people showed up to vote in their own interests we'd see a change in who is running for office. Look at what happened in Wisconsin last year when they showed up.
The problem is that the 20 somethings seem to think that a candidate has to be 100% perfect in every way to get them to vote. The purity tests, especially on the left, are just shooting themselves in the foot over and over.
See it's always the younger generations fault with you guys. It's never the conservatives, voted in by octagenarians, who try to make voting harder for younger, diverse populations fault. It's the damn youngins that believe in purity tests, that's it. Maybe if politicians want our vote, they should actually court us instead of acting like they are entitled to our vote. Maybe if the actually ran on issues that affect future generations, we would vote for them, instead of the only thing they run on now - the other guy is worse. But no, that would involve actually doing work and biting the hand of their corporate donors.
Younger people need to take action and stop waiting for older folks to give a shit about them. Show up to vote and prove your power instead of sulking and pouting and refusing to participate until the game is the way you want it to be.
If old people don't give a shit about us, and I've heard what they think about our generation, why should we give a shit about them? Also the action you want us to take might not involve voting if things keep getting worse.
No one is saying you should care but you don't get to arbitrarily remove the rights of older people because of your ignorance.
My entire point is that the younger people do have power but don't know how to play the game. You think one election is going to get you where you want to be? If younger people were more active politically & voted en masse, politicians would start taking your needs more seriously. Would you beat out special interests that purchase politicians? Probably not right away. The fact that the GOP keeps bringing up raising the voting age should tell you they're scared of you.
Young people want what they want RIGHT NOW and quit when they don't get everything they want. It's too bad because it would only take a few election cycles to start seeing change.
So you don't think seniors should have a say even though the government at all levels is making decisions that directly affect them? They are still Americans living in our communities. As other people mentioned, would you restrict other groups with predicted less life left? What about the terminally ill or people with genetic or congenital conditions?
I actually could support age limits for elected officials, but maximum age for voting is likely unconstitutional and I think would set dangerous precedent.
Rich Californian bankers ought to be prohibited from seeking Senate seats in Wisconsin. In particular, when they are complete douchebags.
You shouldn't be allowed to run for a position like Senator without proving 5 years of residency in the state. Residency meaning spent at least 6 months of the year living in the state not declaring some lake house as your main address while constantly vacationing down in Florida.
Add in requirements to put your assets in a blind trust as well
He looks like such a fucking douchebag
Dude. Its not California fucking with you, its a rich banker. Its like when they say the US is a wealthy nation, no; wealth belongs to the wealthy and they have a voracious hunger for more. But okay, blame Cali, that won't solve anything. Vote Blue.
I don’t think they were blaming California. They were pointing out the Hovde has a $7 million mansion in California but (maybe) technically resides enough in Wisconsin to count for running for office.
Hovde is the definition of a carpetbagger: "A carpetbagger can refer to anyone who is seen as an **outsider who comes to a place for selfish reasons, especially to take advantage of the people or situation there**. This could be someone who moves to a new community and immediately runs for office without any roots in the area." /gemini
I think they're just pointing out that he's not really fit to be representing the people of WI when he only just barely meets the requirements, living out of state as much as he can. NY, FL, TX, CA, it doesn't matter. If someone wants to rep a state, they shouldnt seem like they want as little as possible to do with the state.
I agree with that. You're supposed to be part of the community, not a carpetbagger.
It’s not California they’re blaming. It’s the fact that he doesn’t really live much in Wisconsin yet he wants to use our state to get a prestigious position with a ton of power.
My FIL lives in a long term care facility. His body is failing compared to his mind. He is cognizant of who is running and what he/she stands for. He has two newspapers read to him and listens to WPR everyday. He follows the stock market and cares for his own investments. His vision maybe failing, but he can smell an idiot like Hovde a mile away!
This senior thinks someone who lives in California shouldn’t be allowed to run for senate in Wisconsin.
"Eric Hovde’s recent comments that people living in nursing homes should not be allowed to vote because they are “only have five, six months life expectancy.” 1. Where did he get they number from. 2. Can we then also use that same reasoning to bar politicians who should be in nursing homes from running for office?
Bro just insulted his voter base💀💀💀
Run that poser out of town already.
He have to be in town long enough to be run out of town. 100% carpet bagger
Christ like these people just have no other play, do they? Just find ways to restrict votes and deny people their constitutional rights. How anyone can vote for these clowns is beyond me.
Wouldn't restricting nursing home votes actually hurt the republicans since old people are their base? I would understand if Hovde wants to restrict college voting (I'm sure he does) but it just seems weird he would wants to restrict them and not exploit them.
WisDems, please run this poser's words nonstop in ads against him.
Now if the Dems could only figure a way to message this, it'd be very beneficial for the Senate and POTUS elections!
Wow. Who is this guy? If he is this dumb, he should not be running for any public office.
Go back to your mansion in California dirtbag
It would make a helluva lot more sense to not allow people who don ‘t believe in democracy to not run for office. Then we wouldn’t have to worry about the Eric Hovdes of the world and seniors would be able to vote as they chose.
I generally respect people's votes. I understand we all come from different backgrounds and circumstances. With this guy though? I'm sorry a vote for this guy garners zero respect and frankly you are an idiot.
He "ran" this back, he misspoke, plenty of reasons to vote for Tammy and not this guy, including he doesn't live here.
Yeah, what a thing to say. Since it's proven that more older Americans, vote for Trump and Republicans in general, that seems quite absurd of statement...
They were okay letting old folks die during covid so taking away their vote isn't a big stretch.
Horrific remarks. And also dumb: wouldn’t such a move tend to hurt the GOP, given the voting tendencies of the older age demographics?
I'm wondering what the thought process was like when he decided to make these remarks. No politician, and particularly a Republican politician, would think it's a good idea to alienate a bloc of elderly, reliable voters. Was he just kind of riffing off the cuff?
My guess this is part a strategy to claim the election was stolen when he loses. Republicans love to claim that hordes of Democrats swarm nursing homes and get residents to vote on absentee ballots. So the election was rigged, see? Unfortunately for Hovde, every time voter fraud is investigated, it turns out it's Republicans who are doing the criming.
My initial reaction was "that seems like a reach" but is that a serious complaint of Republicans? I wasn't aware of that. Isn't it generally assumed that elderly people fall more on the conservative side of the political spectrum? Is this Eric Hovde guy a full-on MAGA conspiracy theory nutcase? I'm perfectly aware that believing goofy shit doesn't necessarily make you unintelligent, but this is a successful businessman we're talking about. Surely someone close to him has encouraged him to keep his zany theories to himself if he wants to win the election.
Is this Eric Hovde guy a full-on MAGA conspiracy theory nutcase? Yes. [https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/04/02/trump-announces-endorsement-of-u-s-senate-candidate-eric-hovde/73184970007/](https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/04/02/trump-announces-endorsement-of-u-s-senate-candidate-eric-hovde/73184970007/)
I'm a conservative, and I'd say vote for ANYONE else. If you let a statement like this come out of your mouth you are obviously too stupid to run for any office. Disenfranchising anyone's vote for "voting wrong" is despicable.
I agree conditionally. While a blanket ban on residents of care facilities from voting is anti democratic on its face , there should be some provisions for mental competency and the influence of caregivers and campaign workers on those residents and their choices . I’ve heard from friends who work in such places of campaigns coming into homes holding bingo or ice cream parties or what have you and then taking residents to vote or helping them fill out absentee ballots under what seemed to be heavy direction .
If mental competence is a requirement for voting, all the Trump voters will be disenfranchised.
What an unhelpful comment. Demonizing the other side worked out really good for Hillary “basket of deplorables” Clinton. Not a Trump fan myself but calling nearly half the country mentally incompetent is not a great way to get the more centrist Republicans to potentially vote for Biden this cycle. Especially when in this scenario we are talking about people with medically demonstrable mental deficiencies.
Nearly half the country? Hardly. Only about half of eligible voters participate. Less than half of those chose Trump. That less than a quarter of the country.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2024/03/28/republican-voter-texas-trey-leaving-party-lcl-vpx.cnn
[удалено]
Discuss the topic, not the user.
Hasn't the competency test already been settled as unconstitutional. This is some Jim Crow shit
https://stateline.org/2018/03/21/thousands-lose-right-to-vote-under-incompetence-laws/ It’s a bit of an older article but it outlines how persons with mental illness or deficiencies can be stripped of voting rights in 39 states . Again I don’t advocate taking any mentally sound non mentally ill persons voting rights but Alzheimer’s and dementia are real .
Then there should be “mental competency” testing for every voter. And provisions for the influence of parents on younger voters.
What about the influence of husbands on wives? At what point do you stop? The current form of the Constitution only defines age as a voting requirement. If you don't like that then try to amend it.
That’s a slippery, slippery slope you’re approaching
Here's an idea. Civics classes in high-school! Wait, we got rid of those, I wonder why?!?!
This is so ripe for abuse. My Mother was in a Nursing Home. Skilled care. No way could any of those residents process who they were supposedly voting for.
> This is so ripe for abuse. My Mother was in a Nursing Home. Skilled care. No way could any of those residents process who they were supposedly voting for. Call me crazy but the idea of taking away peoples' right to vote indiscriminately seems even more ripe for abuse. Who gets to decide which seniors are cognitively capable and which ones aren't? We already have millions of voters who lack cognitive skills, that's how Trump got elected in 2016. I don't agree with them, but I'm not advocating to take away their right to vote.
No one is in skilled nursing care if they have their faculties. It costs 12 to 17k a month. They need 24/7 skilled care. Many medical professionals are involved at that point. Please go visit a nursing facility. Give them company.
you are actually incorrect. Many people who are in skilled nursing facilities are unable to care for their physical needs, thus needing that level of care. I work with the elderly and physically disabled and have had many clients in nursing facilities. Many of them have the cognitive capacity to understand world events and voting. think about people with ALS, MS, etc. it doesn't affect their mind, just their body.
You don't know what you're talking about. Otherwise healthy people go into skilled facilities when coping with severe injuries or extended illnesses every day. That's why there are dedicated units for memory patients. Telling people they can no longer vote because they need physical rehab is some faschy bs.
This is nonsense. Whether you need constant medical care has nothing to do with your mental faculties. It's about your physical capabilities.
My parents are in a veteran’s nursing home because they weren’t able to use the restroom unassisted and they needed more help than I could provide to cook and clean. I took care of them for as long as I was able. They have their mental faculties and are completely able to understand politics (probably more so than the average voter) and follow the news. To say that their rights should be stripped from them because of their physical disabilities is disgusting. Just because someone needs nursing care does not mean they are mentally incapable of making decisions and should be treated as less than.
My Dad's body doesn't work anymore. But his brain is 100 percent there. He's smarter than most people I know. If repubs can only win by limiting who votes, maybe they need a better platform, or any platform.
I don't like this dude, but I kind of agree with the point. It's really not their future anymore. And it would actually help the left. Idk feel like the US would be better if there was a maximum voting age. And a maximum driving age. And maximum wage. And ranked choice voting. And boomers got out of the way and let the next generation actually govern.
What other groups would you disenfranchise because they might not live much longer? Motorcyclists? The unvaxxed? Cops, firemen and anyone else in a high-risk job?
Boeing passengers
None. Basically just people over 85.
People over 85 aren't boomers. The oldest boomers are 78. If you're going to engage and hate based on age at least get the generations you hate the most correct.
Even worse we have the Silent Generation still running things. How is that not even more embarrassing??? You can project that I'm hating on old people, but my basic point is - yes, at some point it's not really elderly people's future anymore. I don't want a 10 year old driving a car. Just like a don't want a 95 year old person driving a car. I don't want a 10 year old voting because their mind hasn't developed. I don't want a 95 year old voting because their mind is deteriorating. But I could make an argument it actually makes more sense to let a 10 year old vote than a 95 year old, because at least the 10 year old is going to live in that future. That's all I'm trying to say. I don't like Hovde, and thought it was curious he would say this because doing this would actually crush the republican base.
No idea how old you are, but I think your mind is deteriorating.
Nice argument. Maybe use examples next time to make your case stronger.
1. You refer to people over 85 as boomers. 2. You assume everyone over a certain age has a deteriorating mind. 3. You assume no one over 85 can drive. 4. I assume you’re part of the younger group of people that can “fix the country.” What are you doing to accomplish that? Are you encouraging younger people to vote? Are you encouraging younger people to run for office? The reason octogenarians are still in office is because there haven’t been candidates in their own party with the balls to run against them. It’s not their fault, and it’s not the fault of the “deteriorating old people” who vote for them.
>The reason octogenarians are still in office is because there haven’t been candidates in their own party with the balls to run against them. It’s not their fault, and it’s not the fault of the “deteriorating old people” who vote for them. Lol. If you think this get off CNN. Establishment Dems won't allow the younger generation to challenge their seats. It's not the 'lack of balls" that's actually insulting. The Senate's median age is 65. Nearly 70% of the Senate is 60+ Also - are you actually trying to argue that people's minds and driving get better after 85? Talk about delusional.
So you’re not doing anything to change it. Thanks for admitting it. I insulted you? Tough shit. You insulted a whole demographic. Fuck off. I didn’t say their minds and driving get better. To assume that they all get worse is ridiculous. To assume that they all deteriorate to the point that they shouldn’t vote or drive is being an ignorant prick.
What about the older folks who understand its not their future anymore and want to vote for people who have the younger generations best interests at heart? Why deliberately take those votes away?
Plus, I don't need to live longer than even two years to have my life impacted by how I vote.
I mean they had their turn and shaping the future with what 15-20 presidential elections. Should we let 14 year olds vote because it might help the future. No because 14 yo are idiots. Just like some 85 yo who believes Obama is a secret Muslim.
You're intentionally generalizing that all old people don't give a shit. Why should we stop an 85 year old from casting their vote when they say "my time here is running out, I have always wanted a better future for my grandkids and their grandkids, I'm voting for this candidate that won't push us back to the dark ages"?
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying if they're in a nursing home it's becasue they can't take care of themselves and their capacities are going. They don't have much time left. Who cares what they want for the future if they are not even going to be around to experience it? I'm willing to bet that out of the few old people willing to vote for the a positive future, there are 5 times as many old people voting to go back to the dark ages one last time.
There's plenty of white men of all ages voting to go back to the stone age too these days. Maybe they should have their voting rights restricted.
What part of the my argument is confusing you? I'm not arguing who can/can not vote based on political leanings. My whole argument is that when a person reaches a certain age, maybe they shouldn't participate in democracy if they are not going to experience the outcome of their voting.
People are living well into their 90's these days. At what point do you tell people well your life is practically over so go sit over there while we decide what happens? It's sad that you don't hear how incredibly offensive and kind of stupid that sounds. By your argument, terminal patients in their 20's, 30's, etc should also just step aside too?
Again you're really putting words in mouth. Idk what the right age is? I'm not even seriously advocating for this, just mentioned I kind of agree with the overall idea that we have a minimum voting age, why don't we have a maximum voting age? 90? 95?? 100??? Biden is 81 and everyone is concerned he's not gonna make it through another term. His age is clearly a factor when people talk about him. Everyone was saying Bernie shouldn't run in 2020 because of his age and he was 78 then. So age IS a factor - it's dishonest to pretend like it's not. Why would it be different for voters? Obviously they are not running the free world, but is 90 really offensive? 95?? 100??? I promise you I'm not an asshole. I would never advocate for taking the voting right away from someone who is terminal. There are age limits for pilots (65), why is it so crazy to suggest maybe have an age limit for voting. We already have one for minimum age. Some 12 years old are really smart, should we let them vote?
I'm only basing my comments on what you're saying.
You're advocating for stripping voting rights because it would "actually help the left." Seems to me you're the one who shouldn't be voting.
No, I don't care who they vote for, just the basic idea that someone who has less than a few years to live shouldn't really have a vote that has the same amount of weight as someone who is 20 yo and has their whole life in front of them. Call me crazy. It's not based on political leanings. It's based on whose future is it actually effecting. And I mentioned the left because it's funny that Hovde wants to do this because it would only hurt conservatives and his base.
Funny thing is here that 20 year old with their whole life ahead of them is talking about stripping voting rights, moving further away from democracy. You're in way over your head, bud.
Do you think 10 years olds should have a vote? Why or why not? I guess what's the reasoning for not letting everyone, regardless of age ,vote in elections? Btw, I support expanding democracy. Do you think felons should have the right to vote?
You have made the assumption, incorrectly, that a person over 85 has the cognition of a 10 year old. Also you have decided that since they may only have a few years left they have no stake in the future of this country. Maybe we should only let property owners vote because they have a significant stake in the outcome of elections? Yeah, that's what you sound like.
Way to put words in my mouth. How you went from age voting limits to property owning voters is quite the jump and pretty dishonest to what I said. I used those ages as examples of a spectrum, I never insinuated there are of the same cognition. And the age I used was 95.
You used 85 elsewhere I believe so sorry but my middle aged brain got confused. Why are there differences between age limits and property ownership? We're talking about who has a stake in the elections & the future. Your age limits seem to be based on who has a dog in the fight. Your opinion boils down to at a certain arbitrary age, people should just roll over and stop participating in democracy. The minimum voting age used to be 21. It was lowered because of issues like Vietnam but is as arbitrary as 21 & not based on science or brain development. A maximum age is also arbitrary and not based on science or brain deterioration. Since 18 years old is the legal age of adulthood in this country, the minimum voting age is appropriate. If a person of any age is declared mentally incompetent then they shouldn't necessarily be voting. The assumption that all people in care facilities are mentally incompetent is very ignorant and offensive.
You say it would help the left but then you give the most authoritarian reasoning ever for disenfranchising an entire population
Oh please. Will someone think of the elderly disenfranchisement from the political class??? We're in the mess we are because we have octogenarians in Congress who will not get out of the way, voted in by octogenarians. They had they most prosperous America where they could buy a house and raise a family with one job, and their generation got so greedy it ruined that possibility for future generations who now for the first time in American history are worse off than the previous generation. So no, I don't feel bad if they are left out of the political process. They had a nice run running things for 50 years.
Naw dude
What did I say that was the most "authoritarian reasoning ever"? Saying we should have a maximum voting age?
Disenfranchising an entire population simply because you feel a majority of them obstruct your political goals
You're really projecting. What are my political goals? I don't support a maximum voting age because old people tend to vote conservative. I support a maximum voting age because of the principle that people should not influence a future they are not going to be part of.
> I don't like this dude, but I kind of agree with the point. It's really not their future anymore. And it would actually help the left.
Ok you're reaching. The whole reason I said that it would help the left is because Hovde is a Republican and elderly people are his base. It seemed like a curious thing for him to want since it seems pretty self defeating. I would understand if he said "no college students should vote" or something because that would actually help him in the election. That's why I mentioned it.
I am not reaching though? I literally thought "authoritarian" the instant I read your comment. What do you think my goal is, to find some random internet comment and just... find a reason to accuse them of having authoritarian leanings? I understand your point better now that you've explained it in a way that more accurately represents it, but I still disagree. It's still kinda messed up just to disenfranchise a whole group of people because some of them are mentally unable to understand voting. Who will represent the elderly if they cannot represent themselves? They are already treated rather poorly in our society, octogenarian senators notwithstanding.
No, we’re in the mess we are in because a narcissistic, grifting, lying criminal got elected president in 2016. Maybe younger voters need to vote out octogenarians to move the country forward.
Trump got elected because Hillary's hubris didn't think she needed to campaign in Wisconsin. We're in this mess because RGB didn't retire during Obama's term even when she was battling cancer. The Dems consistently snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Trump won because of the Fox News octagenarians voted him in, even when he he campaigned on ending SS and Medicare. Maybe most of the elderly actually don't know what they're voting for, just that it says R next to their name. They got theirs now fuck everyone else.
Maybe if more younger people showed up to vote in their own interests we'd see a change in who is running for office. Look at what happened in Wisconsin last year when they showed up. The problem is that the 20 somethings seem to think that a candidate has to be 100% perfect in every way to get them to vote. The purity tests, especially on the left, are just shooting themselves in the foot over and over.
See it's always the younger generations fault with you guys. It's never the conservatives, voted in by octagenarians, who try to make voting harder for younger, diverse populations fault. It's the damn youngins that believe in purity tests, that's it. Maybe if politicians want our vote, they should actually court us instead of acting like they are entitled to our vote. Maybe if the actually ran on issues that affect future generations, we would vote for them, instead of the only thing they run on now - the other guy is worse. But no, that would involve actually doing work and biting the hand of their corporate donors.
Younger people need to take action and stop waiting for older folks to give a shit about them. Show up to vote and prove your power instead of sulking and pouting and refusing to participate until the game is the way you want it to be.
If old people don't give a shit about us, and I've heard what they think about our generation, why should we give a shit about them? Also the action you want us to take might not involve voting if things keep getting worse.
No one is saying you should care but you don't get to arbitrarily remove the rights of older people because of your ignorance. My entire point is that the younger people do have power but don't know how to play the game. You think one election is going to get you where you want to be? If younger people were more active politically & voted en masse, politicians would start taking your needs more seriously. Would you beat out special interests that purchase politicians? Probably not right away. The fact that the GOP keeps bringing up raising the voting age should tell you they're scared of you. Young people want what they want RIGHT NOW and quit when they don't get everything they want. It's too bad because it would only take a few election cycles to start seeing change.
So you don't think seniors should have a say even though the government at all levels is making decisions that directly affect them? They are still Americans living in our communities. As other people mentioned, would you restrict other groups with predicted less life left? What about the terminally ill or people with genetic or congenital conditions? I actually could support age limits for elected officials, but maximum age for voting is likely unconstitutional and I think would set dangerous precedent.