dumb ass kids don't deserve to vote

[Sapphire Bullet]

According to an MTV poll(yeah, take it with a grain of salt), ONE QUARTER of 18-24 yr olds could not name one of the presidential candidates, and SEVENTY PERCENT could not name one of the vice-presidential candidates!

And these stupid fucking kids wonder why the candidates don't speak to their issues!

I wish you had to pass some sort of general knowledge test before you could vote. At least know what you were voting for and who was in the fucking race! Morons. I hate being a part of this generation.

All these movements to get people out to the polls make me sick. Do you really want one of those oblivious fools in the voting booth? Getting people to vote just for the sake of a high turnout is a mistake. We should spend a little more time making sure the people voting have a clue as to what they are doing. The fewer people that vote the better- an uninformed populace with the vote is the most dangerous thing in the world.

[fnord1966]

I think the canidates should take the same test before they can run, Gore especially.

[SPOOFE]

Hey, just think of it this way... it's that 25% that provides the possibility of success from dark horse candidates. It adds a new dimension to the electoral process...

"Candidate Felcher seems to be the most popular, but the Ignorant Sector could possibly sway the nomination to Candidate Squicker."

[activgurl]

It ain't only dumbass kids, either. My grandmother voted a straight ticket all of her life, I believe. She once asked me why I didn't vote a straight ticket. I told her if she could name her party's candidate for a particular office, I would be GLAD to vote for that individual. Of course, she got in a snit & refused to speak to me the rest of the day.

[VaHermit]

Sapphire,

I turned 18 in February, 1972 ...the last year of the Viet Nam draft. After a long, hard fight, we (Eighteen-year-olds) had just recently won the right to vote. Our argument was that if we were old enough to fight and die for our country, we were old enough to decide which leaders we would fight and die for.

Those were the days of Kent State and SDS, I believed in a cause back then and I, as well as many others, fought hard to see it through. Rather than run away to Canada, I logged thousands of miles riding my thumb to attend rallys and fight what I thought was an unjust system. I had the pleasure of giving "Tricky Dick" the finger to his face, (not a real good idea unless you enjoy being escorted aside and questioned for three hours, but thats a whole different story in itself).

I really don't think you have to worry much about the uninformed masses you mention, they're probably not the type to get off their asses and vote anyway (I'm a good one to talk, I don't participate in federal level elections anymore either... again, a different story).

I haven't seen a poll and can't back this up, but I'd be surprised if the over-18 segment of our population rated much higher in their political awareness.

The right of eighteen-year-olds to vote, like most of our rights, was hard won with a lot of sweat, sacrifice and tear gas, not to mention a few innocent lives. Please don't be too quick to toss it away.

[Typo Negative]

Originally posted by Sapphire Bullet
According to an MTV poll(yeah, take it with a grain of salt), ONE QUARTER of 18-24 yr olds could not name one of the presidential candidates, and SEVENTY PERCENT could not name one of the vice-presidential candidates!



I keep saying, over and over, polls don't mean spit. I mean, are they polling teens who are coming in for the 'Tom Green' show? 'MTV's beach party'? 'Loveline'? 70% of that group wouldn't be able to spell their own names. Can we say this is representative of the teen community at large?

Or did they just happen to ask them questions after they had smoked a bongload?

[Valerieblaise]

I turned 18 in 1992, not that terribly long ago. I was in college that fall, and my entire dorm floor got together to watch all of the debates, and then afterwards we'd debate the various issues amongst ourselves. Every one of us voted - most of us actually went to the polls in groups. However, I don't believe a single one of us ever participated in an MTV poll. I can't even imagine taking that network seriously as a news source, much less an accurate reflection of the opinions of 18-24 year old voters.

[BoBettie]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure of the accuracy of a poll done by the same network that brings you gems like "Jackass". Sounds like an invented figure meant to freak people out to me. Just my gut reaction.

Where did they interview these 18-24 year olds? At a kegger? Joe's 2nd annual Crack Fest?

Zette

[matt_mcl]

Uh, maybe if these kids had any reason to feel that the difference between the Republocratic Party and the Demmican Party represented an actual choice, they'd be more interested in politics.

[relic_11]

[dripping scarcasm]Thank you! Thanks for realizing that every single last one of us teenagers are the same! I never thought some one would realize that we aren't (God forbid) diffrent![/dripping scarsam]

I am 18. I am going to vote. I also see where those teenagers who aren't voting are coming from. They don't care about us, why should we care about them? Faulty logic, yes, but I understand.

Hey, can you name ALL the canidates? No relavence, just wondering...

BTW... ONE QUARTER? One fucking QUARTER! Take a fucking pool of "adults" for the same question. See what happens.
And a fucking MTV poll? Please. Like that's a ramdom sample. Not even close to accurate.

[wring]

the problem is uninformed voters of any demographic, thank you.

[Sapphire Bullet]

1. VaHermit, I think you are right. The majority of 18 yr olds who fought to earn the right to vote cared about it more (on average) than 18 yr olds of today (on average). I love that I got the right to vote at 18. But the majority of my friends and peers unfortunately couldn't care less.

2. spooje, I know, polls aren't the end all be all measurement of the people's pulse, but isn't it scary that the people questioned in this poll didn't know? Even with the candidates making the rounds on Letterman and Leno?

3. matt, how can you say there isn't a difference? The main difference is money- what are they going to do with mine? And if the youth truly feels that the Dems or Reps don't differ, that doesn't mean they can't vote Libertarian or Green or Reform! Those aren't wasted votes! They send a message, especially if exit polls show the high 3rd party votes are youth votes.

4. relic (my favorite), I am so glad you understood my post! All you damned whipper-snappers are ruining everything! The point wasn't for you to react in a "knee-jerk" fashion. The point is that it's scary that MTV could find ANY people who couldn't even name one candidate. Yeah, I know teen-agers are different. Thanks for the heads up.
Politicians don't care about the 18-24s because the 18-24s don't vote. Do you know the turnout numbers for that age group? The seniors live to vote. Even if it is a straight ticket (yuck activgurl!), they go to the polls in massive numbers! If the youth got motivated and our turnout numbers shot through the roof, you would hear the candidates speaking to us. Even after 1992, with Bill Clinton courting the youth vote, the numbers weren't markedly higher, so sure, politicians figured they had limited time and money, why waste it on people who won't vote?

And yeah, I can name all the candidates.

5. wring, I agree with you. An uniformed populace with the vote is the most dangerous thing in the world.

[Munch]

I would just like to know why people are so quick to dismiss MTV as a viable polling agency. I don't think a network that relies almost entirely upon revenue from the age group in question is going to be so anxious to portray them as bumbling idiots, do you?

And Valerieblaise, no one on your "entire dorm floor" was polled? How odd to think that out of a pool of veritable millions, that the 40 some people on your floor didn't get a single representative...

[SPOOFE]

I'm 19, and I'm not exactly looking forward to the election (I had briefly considered deliberately throwing my vote away, then decided that'd be an anal thing to do). I only regret not being able to start my participation in the electoral process by deciding 'tween more dynamic candidates (we need Jess Ventura to run... at least he'd be fun :D)

[Scotticher]

Yes, the aforementioned kids don't deserve to vote.

Neither do d+++++s adults deserve to vote.

Thing is, who decides who is a d+++++s, and who is intelligent enough to be allowed to vote?

Turns out, whoever disagrees with a person is too much of a d+++++s to vote. I think that this is why we are all allowed one vote, so that those of us who think they know best (which is all of us, of course) have only one vote, and the rest of the populace have one vote to express their opinion also.

Intelligence and common sense have very little to do with age, IMHO.

[SPOOFE]

You scan say it, Scott, this is the Pit!

Dumbass, dumbass, dumbass...

"The name is Dumass..."

[Max the Immortal]

Here's how I think votes should be given:

Upon graduating high school (NOT turning 18), each person takes a standardized IQ test. The person then gets one vote per point of his/her general IQ score, plus one point per year that person has lived. One gets a 50% bonus to his/her votes for having at least one post-secondary degree (100% if it's a political science degree). Sure, tallying votes would be more of a hassle, but one vote per person is kinda silly. Why should an MTV dumbass have the same amount of voting power as a middle-aged small business owner (who is affect more drastically by who is in power) who follows the issues? Yeah, I know this system wouldn't work, but it's mine, so I like it.

Seriously, though, I do think that people should have to pass a test to register to vote. After that, they should keep informed about what going on in politics. It's not hard.

[sk8rixtx]

Max:

"All men are created equal..." sound familiar?

[sk8rixtx]

p.s. I'm all for your voting system.

[pepperlandgirl]

Well, I just turned 18, and I never got around to registering. But it's ok. You know why? Because my mother knows jack-shit about politics. While I was watching the Debates, she walked into the room, looked right at Gore and Dubya and said "Who are they?" So, I'm filling out her sample ballot, and she's going to vote off of it. My dad likes Dubya, (The one point we differ on), but other than that he is so oblivious, that I'm going to fill out his sample ballot too. (For the issues other than Indecision 2000)
So, go ahead and continue to say that all teens are stupid. But in this house, it's the adults who don't have a clue, and the teen who gets to have her voice heard twice. (Too bad I never registered, then it would have been thrice. Oh well.)

Seriously, though, I do think that people should have to pass a test to register to vote. After that, they should
keep informed about what going on in politics. It's not hard.
Uh, didn't the Supreme Court deem that sort of testing, (as well as the "poll-tax") unconstitutional?

[Helen's Eidolon]

I live in Canada and I can name a lot of the american candidates....

An election's being called here on Nov. 27th, and I just cannot wait to vote. It's the one thing I've been looking forward to for when I turn 18 (I could buy alcohol and whatever before, too). I am planning on taking it seriously, as I know most of my friends are. In some ways, I'd think the younger voters would be MORE interested in voting. Our first chance to make our voices count... defihitely something I'm looking forward to.

[Diesel]

MTV.
Voting.

Voting.
MTV.

I seriously think the pairing of these two should end at TRL. Doesn't anyone realize that the people they are trying to persuade into choosing our leaders are the same people who can't decide between spending four hours online to put the Backstreet Boys or *N SYNC in the #1 spot?

[Lazarus7]

Originally posted by LaurAnge
I live in Canada and I can name a lot of the american candidates....

An election's being called here on Nov. 27th, and I just cannot wait to vote. It's the one thing I've been looking forward to for when I turn 18 (I could buy alcohol and whatever before, too). I am planning on taking it seriously, as I know most of my friends are. In some ways, I'd think the younger voters would be MORE interested in voting. Our first chance to make our voices count... defihitely something I'm looking forward to.

I hear you on this one !!

As a Canadian, I am quite in tune with the American election ... I wonder what % of the American public can name our Prime Minister (or note the fact that he is a PM), or even point at Canada on a map ... *grin*

[Gozu Tashoya]

My current favorite quote from my college graduate friend: "Who's Ralph Nader?" :rolleyes:

[Nacho4Sara]

I think it's kind of shitty to assume that because there are some stupid teenagers, then all of us are idiots. I have been registered to vote since I turned 18 (I'm 19 now) and I could debate the issues as well as any 35 year old, perhaps even better. In fact, you might be interested to know that this morning on the smoking terrace at work, about 7 of us (all around the age of 20) got into a political debate. There were 3 guys, aged around 30, who just sat there, and one woman, I'd say 40, who kept quiet too.

I also think that it's narrow-minded to think MTV is not helping younger kids with politics. Although I never watch MTV anymore, I used to regularly (pre-TRL, thankyouverymuch) and watching the "Rock the Vote" coverage was what really influenced me to become a part of this election. Maybe they are fluffy and silly, but it is a voice teenagers will listen to, much more so than CNN.

Also...

ONE QUARTER of 18-24 yr olds could not name one of the presidential candidates, and SEVENTY PERCENT could not name one of the vice-presidential candidates

How many did they ask, I wonder? One hundred? Because from personal experiance, I'd say these statistics are bullshit.

And...

Upon graduating high school (NOT turning 18), each person takes a standardized IQ test. The person then gets one vote per point of his/her general IQ score, plus one point per year that person has lived. One gets a 50% bonus to his/her votes for having at least one post-secondary degree (100% if it's a political science degree). Sure, tallying votes would be more of a hassle, but one vote per person is kinda silly. Why should an MTV dumbass have the same amount of voting power as a middle-aged small business owner (who is affect more drastically by who is in power) who follows the issues?

I have a better idea. Why don't we give everyone an IQ test at the age of 12. If they score under a hundred, they get branded with "STUPID" across their forehead.

That sure would help a lot. At least I wouldn't have to listen to ridiculous ideas like this one.

[Or'n'ry Oscar]

Kids will get out to vote when each and every one of them (say between 18 and 30) is willing to pay $9 per year to establish an organization to lobby for them, affect legislation and inform them about the issues via direct mail. Oldsters have AARP that does specifically that for them and allows the additional benefits of cheaper hotel rooms and buffet dinners to boot.

It seems to me that it is precisely that 18 to 30 demographic that advertisers wish to attract because of its huge disposable income. Why can't that same demographic develop a non-partisan lobbying and information arm of its own?

I suspect the reason is simple: no one in government really wants larger numbers of younger people voting, because issues such as job training, education and better day care for young workers would require huge funding increases that older, wealthy, enfranchised people are unwilling to pay for. The pie will only feed so many: as it is currently constituted, it can feed the elderly (because they demand it), but not youth (because they'd rather be skating).

[RickJay]

Originally posted by Sapphire Bullet
1. VaHermit, I think you are right. The majority of 18 yr olds who fought to earn the right to vote cared about it more (on average) than 18 yr olds of today (on average). I love that I got the right to vote at 18. But the majority of my friends and peers unfortunately couldn't care less.

2. spooje, I know, polls aren't the end all be all measurement of the people's pulse, but isn't it scary that the people questioned in this poll didn't know? Even with the candidates making the rounds on Letterman and Leno?

Actually, it's not "Scary" at all, because the numbers don't mean anything. A "poll" that isn't random and was probably self-selected to some extent is absolutely meaningless; they may as well be randomly selected.

[Sapphire Bullet]

Originally posted by RickJay
Actually, it's not "Scary" at all, because the numbers don't mean anything. A "poll" that isn't random and was probably self-selected to some extent is absolutely meaningless; they may as well be randomly selected.

Actually, it is since obviously they asked someone these questions, and they couldn't answer. That the poll was random has nothing to do with the fact that even with the extensive coverage of the campaigns, some morons out there can't even be bothered to know the names of the candidates. And we aren't talking about the obscure ones, like Natural Law, or Socialist! How many of you have been able to turn on the tv and NOT see Gore's or Bush's faces??

How many did they ask, I wonder? One hundred? Because from personal experiance, I'd say these statistics are bullshit.

Does it even matter??! The fact is THEY COULDN"T ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION! Even one person not knowing at least one candidate is a pretty sad state of affairs.

Yeah, I attacked "kids." And of course I meant every single 18-24 yr old alive. Nacho, I don't know what numbers you have "personally experienced" but the idea that young people are uninformed and do not vote is not one first introduced by MTV. It's a fairly well documented trend. Why do you think Rock the Vote and now the NAACP's Get Your Vote On came to be?

There were 3 guys, aged around 30, who just sat there, and one woman, I'd say 40, who kept quiet too.

what makes you suspect it was out of ignorance? Now who is jumping to conclusions?

[Myrr21]

You know.... shut the fuck up.

I don't care what you meant, but you opened a thread that at least flirted with telling me that my entire age group is uninformed and unintelligent.
And these stupid fucking kids wonder why the candidates don't speak to their issues!
Fuck you. Fuck you. Fuck you.
I don't think I even have my own issues to be spoken to, but maybe that's just me.
**umm, Manager to Aisle Five; we've got an 18-24 year-old here who seems to have spilled some youth issues all over the place**

This is M-fucking-TV. They probably polled four people, and the one who couldn't answer was either drunk, stoned, both, or just didn't want to talk to them. As like as not 25% of teens don't want to talk to MTV, and will ingore their asinine polls. Now quitcherwhining and go find yourself a two by four to get hit with.
I'm in awfully combattive modd tonight, hmmm...

[GuanoLad]

I have only voted once, and the person I voted for did not get in.

I personally don't believe my vote counts at all, and anyway, all politicians, in my experience, are exactly the same - unqualified greedy petty ineffectual schmoozers.

I am proud to be indifferent!

[NothingMan]

Originally posted by Diesel
Doesn't anyone realize that the people they are trying to persuade into choosing our leaders are the same people who can't decide between spending four hours online to put the Backstreet Boys or *N SYNC in the #1 spot?

Oh hell, call me an optimist . . .but I tend to think those blocks of N*Street voters are more in the 10 - 15 year old female category. Which is to say, of the non-voting variety. Although I do agree that the idea of those mindless dolts having a say in the next leader of the free world is quite frightening.

Sure there is a good bit of voter apathy among my age group. I chalk it up to the fact that choosing between Bush and Gore appears on many levels to be similiar to the huge oatmeal or cream of wheat debate. More than that, I think it's a vicious cycle. The politicians don't attempt to discuss issues relevant to the younger generation because they believe it is time wasted on a group who will not vote. The young people are not excited about the election because the candidates are not speaking to them. Which came first . . . the chicken or the egg ?

Yep, I am voting.


- NM





If I can't hunt rabbits with a AK-47, my freakin' Constitutional rights have been violated !!!

[Sapphire Bullet]

You know.... shut the fuck up.
I don't care what you meant, but you opened a thread that at least flirted with telling me that my entire age group is
uninformed and unintelligent.

not that it's relevant, but it's my age group as well.
Are you denying that our age group is notorious for being uninformed and apathetic?

I chalk it up to the fact that choosing between Bush and Gore appears on many levels to be similiar to the huge oatmeal or cream of wheat debate.

So vote independent. There are at least 5 other parties with candidates running for office- one of which is bound to be on your ballot. At least then the youth vote numbers increase and we look like we care.

[UnEasyRider]

It is really much easier to sluff the whole thing off. Don't worry about the candidates or what position they have on any issues. Party hardy and wake up one day wondering how things came to be in the state they are in. Don't apply this to any one age group because every age group in the USA is guilty of this idiotic behavior. What's really great is those who bitch and moan the most never vote because they think it is wasted. We are a nation of lazy morons for having this kind of attitude. How can we look other countries in the eye, telling them about free election of government when we have such a low voter turnout. Some day the phrase use it or lose it will have a meaning everyone will finally understand.

[Nacho4Sara]

Well, I don't want to respond...I tend not to when the person I am repsonding to pats everyone who agrees on the back and attacks the one who happens to have a different thought, but hey:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There were 3 guys, aged around 30, who just sat there, and one woman, I'd say 40, who kept quiet too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


what makes you suspect it was out of ignorance? Now who is jumping to conclusions?

I just observed. You know, like the dumbass poll you quoted - I asked some political questions and the only ones who got involved were the younger ones. If you scan back to my post, you will quickly realize that I never concluded anything, just pointed out what happened. Since this evidence flies in the face of what you concluded, I thought it might be relevent.

So, I guess YOU jumped the ball on that one, huh? You have a little pie on your face right there - yup, you got it.

Yeah, I attacked "kids." And of course I meant every single 18-24 yr old alive.

Well, you did say:

1.ONE QUARTER of 18-24 yr olds could not name one of the presidential candidates, and SEVENTY PERCENT could not name one of the vice-presidential candidates!

and

2.And these stupid fucking kids wonder why the candidates don't speak to their issues!

What stupid fucking kids? All the 18-24 year olds you mentioned in the first quote?

Are you attempting to draw a line between people who are 21 and "kids" and those who are "adults"? Because it's very fuzzy.

Nacho, I don't know what numbers you have "personally experienced" but the idea that young people are uninformed and do not vote is not one first introduced by MTV.

I'm glad you're busy bitching about it. Way to make a change. I campaigned for a local senator before I was old enough to vote, along with about 15 other kids my age. I also served as a page to the Senate my senior year in high school and sat through all the meetings in Annapolis while living there for two weeks. I attended a volunteer summit in DC and met Bill Clinton. All of these included many other people my age who were very interested in politics. That is my "personal experiance" and it therefore rings more true than the poll you addressed.

All the people my age (your age too) who have replied to your OP have basically said that this poll is not necessarily representative of reality. What more do you want?

[Typo Negative]

I gotta ask this.

Have any of you ever been asked a question or questions by a person you did not know? Any of you get a sudden yen to fuck with head of some busybody? You know, give wrong answers, wrong directions, yank their chain? I know I did, in my increaingly distant youth.

Hey, I'm sure some of the kids couldn't name the canidates. But I've seen Leno ask people (adults) if they could name the capital of their home state, or find it on a map, and blow it.

But part of me thinks some of these kids were having a bit of fun with the questioner to skew the results a little.

Which, as always, brings me back to the inescapeable position that polls don't mean shit! We don't know:
1) who was asked, 2) how the questions were phrased(which is important) 3) the level of integrity of the pollster or 4) the level of integrity of the those who commision and report the results, or their agenda and 5) the statistical methods they used.

Why should we believe any poll?

[Sapphire Bullet]

If you scan back to my post, you will quickly realize that I never concluded anything, just pointed out what happened.
Well, I apologize if I read into it something that was not there. It seemed that you were championing the intelligence of the younger people over the older people.

What stupid fucking kids? All the 18-24 year olds you mentioned in the first quote?

The "stupid fucking kids" who couldn't answer the pollster. Yes, polls are suspect. Yes, polls should not be assumed to speak for the entire population (or the segment represented). I did not say that this poll meant that every "kid" (18-24, by popular opinion) was a moron. I expressed dismay that anyone could get away with not knowing a single candidate. My ire was directed at "kids" because this age group tends to complain that the candidates ignore them.

How many did they ask, I wonder? One hundred?

Incidentally, the poll was a joint effort between CBS and MTV. They polled a "nationally representative sample" of 600+ people.

And spooje, no, I don't think that these kids would get a kick out of looking dumb. Maybe that's just me.

I'm glad you're busy bitching about it. Way to make a change.
pretty cheap shot, don't you think? Why are you assuming that I am uninvolved? Why do you assume that I haven't done the same or more of the things you have done? Is it unheard of for a person who is trying to make a change to get frustrated?

I campaigned for a local senator before I was old enough to vote, along with about 15 other kids my age. I also served as a page to the Senate my senior year in high school and sat through all the meetings in Annapolis while living there for two weeks. I attended a volunteer summit in DC and met Bill Clinton. All of these included many other people my age who were very interested in politics. That is my "personal experiance" and it therefore rings more true than the poll you addressed.

That's great! I agree, your experience doesn't sound like you were surrounded by apathetic youth. But do you really think this is the norm? If it is, then why do you think youth apathy has become a focus the past few years?

All the people my age (your age too) who have replied to your OP have basically said that this poll is not necessarily representative of reality. What more do you want?

Let me reiterate, I did not say that I felt this poll represented all youth. However, I think denying the trend that 18-24s don't vote because people we know do vote is pretty ridiculous. And the sentiment that 18-24s don't vote because the candidates don't speak to them is a weak reason. I think the personal experiences of a few people shouldn't be taken as gospel- just a poll shouldn't either. OKAY? Can I stop fielding comments about how I think all 18-24s are morons? The horse is dead folks. Let's move on.

[jabe]

.....Although I would have kicked Nixon in the nuts. Just kidding, violence is bad, m'kay.

[dougie_monty]

I took Senior Government in high school a few years before the amendment enfranchising 18-year-olds went into effect. The teacher lambasted--by name--at least one of his own students in another period, as becoming eligible to vote at 21, according to the law at the time.
He also said that people should not have the right to vote unless they can pass an examination on government and politics, and own real estate.
I told this to my mother and she spat back, "Yeah--and have both eyes on the same side of the nose!" (I still wonder whether I should have quoted her to him; I never did so.)

[beakerxf]

It doesn't matter if the "dumb-ass" respondents of deserve the vote or not. If they can't name the candidates or their running mates, odds are that they weren't planning to vote anyway.

I personally don't feel we need standardized testing for voting. People who don't care to pay attention, don't care to vote either. They sort themselves out.

I just gotta say a hearty fuck you to the teacher who thought that only landowners should be allowed to vote. Thanks to college loans I can't seriously consider buying a home until I'm 30. Besides, in today's economy, renting can sometimes be more economic than buying because of high land prices, cost of building upkeep, and insurance. Owning land is not a good indicator of voting intelligence, IMHO.

[Grendel69]

Quote...
"I wish you had to pass some sort of general knowledge test before you could vote."

Standardized tests!

That's the answer to everything.

Yup.

That way everyone who can afford to acquire the knowledge tested by them will get to vote and everyone who can't...won't!

Fantastic.

While we're doing this, let's go into Miami or the Bronx and poll some of the immigrant neighborhoods. When they don't answer the poll to our liking we can challenge their voting rights with a test as well.
<coughcoughjimcrowlawscoughcough>

This is eerie and idiotic.

If you recognize that polling 600 people on a national issue doesn't mean shit, then why the hell did you open this thread???

I don't care if CBS (sidenote: aren't they notoriously known as the "geriatric tv network") collaborated with MTV. That doesn't add validity to the study. You don't know the manner in which they phrased the questions. Did they ask "Who is running for president?" or was it more along the lines of "Who is on the GOP ticket?" Some people might readily answer the first question, but hesitate on the second one as they aren't completely sure what GOP or ticket mean.

[Nocturne]

A note to Max and his IQ test:

IQ (Intelligence Quotient) is only a measure of POTENTIAL one person has, not actually knowledge. I've seen people with an IQ of 110 outsmart and outthink a person with an IQ of 150. It's all in how you use it or if you use it at all. Giving people IQ tests to vote would be the same as putting them through Olympic trials to vote. Would YOU like that?

Somehow, I don't think so.

[mblackwell]

In my experiance, highschool students really care about politics. I remember several tomes in highschool when debates broke out in class. , And this includes people that aren't 18 yet. Infact, just the other day a 17 year old I know came up to me and told me to vote for Bush because he agrees with Bush's social security plan.

[MsRobyn]

When I was in high school, we were having a debate on the abortion issue (Webster had just come out, and since most of us were 17 and 18, it seemed appropriate to discuss access to reproductive health care). It was an attempt by the teacher to try to get all of us involved and to examine and express our feelings on this issue.

Several girls said stuff like "I'm pro-life because that's what my parents are." The teacher said "So if you became pregnant, you wouldn't consider abortion?" One girl from that bunch said "I didn't say that. I said I'm pro-life."

So, we have kids who don't even understand the terminology, let alone the issues, and whose opinions simply mirror their parents.

I'm wondering if some group like the League of Women Voters has or can develop a political education curriculum to help educate new voters on issues of current import. That may help the problem.

Robin

[RickJay]

Yeah, I attacked "kids." And of course I meant every single 18-24 yr old alive. Nacho, I don't know what numbers you have "personally experienced" but the idea that young people are uninformed and do not vote is not one first introduced by MTV. It's a fairly well documented trend. Why do you think Rock the Vote and now the NAACP's Get Your Vote On came to be?

Both those organizations have specific political agendas, and frankly are interested in getting people to vote for certain candidates, NOT in informing the voters.

[Daerlyn]

Speaking as an 18 to 24 year old.

Yes, a lot of people my age are uninformed. However, a lot of them are very well informed. I live in Canada, and while personally not really caring about US elections, I still know who the main candidates are. I know who the main candidates are up here in the frozen north as well. So do most of the people of my group of friends. Maybe I just hang out with statistical flukes, maybe not.

And on a slightly unrelated point, gratuitous obscenities probably aren't the best way to convince someone of the validity of your arguments. I know this is the Pit, but still. There's expletives, and then there's swearing for the sake of swearing.