General Election 2019

Who will you be voting for

  • Labour

    Votes: 63 21.3%
  • Conservative

    Votes: 128 43.2%
  • Brexit party if they run

    Votes: 25 8.4%
  • Lib dems

    Votes: 47 15.9%
  • SNP

    Votes: 16 5.4%
  • Greens

    Votes: 9 3.0%
  • DUP

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 8 2.7%

  • Total voters
    296
  • Poll closed .
If any of these amendments pass then the bill is being pulled. May need to archive this thread at some point tonight! :rotfl:
Then parliment in dead-lock again until end Jan's next No Deal panic but next EU will likely not agree an extension.
 
I'm aware there will not be time to let them vote in this GE I think they should be allowed to vote.
If he looses the amendment and if it's allowed (which I don't think it will) then he will pull the election bill.
Wants it his own way as usual
No, if 16/17 ammendment passes there's no election this year. Why Libs arnt supposedly backing it.
 
"16 year olds pay taxes" is dubious as well.

Most 16 and 17 year olds are in schools, colleges or other education and or training. Percentage seems to be around 80% or higher.

About 4% are unemployed.

In single percentage figures are those in full time employment and that will be on a lower wage than that of an adult.
 
If 16 year olds are so responsible, why aren't they allowed to buy tobacco or alcohol?
 
And that's why they shouldn't have the vote :) So they can't vote to make recreational drugs and 1300cc motorbikes available to 16 year olds. :devil:
 
They can join the army at 16 and possibly defend the country with their lives, so why not be given the vote ? It's a moot point as the deputy speaker hasn't selected that amendment by the looks of it.

Professor Curtice has made an interesting set of predictions -
 
And that's why they shouldn't have the vote :) So they can't vote to make recreational drugs and 1300cc motorbikes available to 16 year olds. :devil:

If you think about it 16 year olds who aren't bothered or interested will just carry on with their lives as normal on election day. Those who are interested though will take their opportunity. They shouldn't be deprived of the chance just because they've been generalised as not being mature enough.

At 18 there's also plenty who aren't interested and don't vote either. And certainly some who aren't mature enough either.

There has to be a cut off and it should be 16. Thought that long before Brexit came along as well. So that's not an influence.
 
If you think about it 16 year olds who aren't bothered or interested will just carry on with their lives as normal on election day. Those who are interested though will take their opportunity. They shouldn't be deprived of the chance just because they've been generalised as not being mature enough.

At 18 there's also plenty who aren't interested and don't vote either. And certainly some who aren't mature enough either.

There has to be a cut off and it should be 16. Thought that long before Brexit came along as well. So that's not an influence.
Understand your thinking but I'm in agreement with over 90% of other countries at 18+

Revisit it over the coming years.
 
There has to be a cut off and it should be 16. Thought that long before Brexit came along as well. So that's not an influence.
Not for you, perhaps, but if we are planning an election for less than 2 months away, why try and introduce it now? It's a cynical attempt to either delay the election or to pull on board a demographic likely to vote on the side of the proposer
 
Not for you, perhaps, but if we are planning an election for less than 2 months away, why try and introduce it now? It's a cynical attempt to either delay the election or to pull on board a demographic likely to vote on the side of the proposer

As I suggested in the other thread, it's an advantage to be gained. I expect nothing less.

But Johnson threatening to pull the bill altogether over it? Pathetic.

But it's a moot point now anyway :thumbsup:
 
As I suggested in the other thread, it's an advantage to be gained. I expect nothing less.

But Johnson threatening to pull the bill altogether over it? Pathetic.

But it's a moot point now anyway :thumbsup:
Corbyn playing 9th vs 12th...... Pathetic (as BBC saying just now too). Political gaming.
 
Not true, they aren't allowed to fight until they are 18

The point I was making is that by joining the army at 16 and seeing it through until you reach combat age shows a level of maturity and responsibility. I don't see there being a lot of difference between 16, 17, and 18 year old's. The brain doesn't fully mature until you hit your 20's going by the latest research. If you want to get into the neuroscience side of things, might have to raise the voting age to 30 ;)
 
The point I was making is that by joining the army at 16 and seeing it through until you reach combat age shows a level of maturity and responsibility. I don't see there being a lot of difference between 16, 17, and 18 year old's. The brain doesn't fully mature until you hit your 20's going by the latest research. If you want to get into the neuroscience side of things, might have to raise the voting age to 30 ;)
I know about 3 who joined after leaving school. All didn't have grades good enough to go further education and was an easy option for them, nothing to do with maturity. I'm not saying this applies to all.
 
30 is too high, but I think there is a stronger case for raising the age than dropping it. 21 would be reasonable, though I'm happy with the status quo.

Let's have a royal commission on the whole subject rather than leave it to politicians trying to gerrymander things to suit themselves.
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom