Whenever anyone asks me, “John, do you think children should be allowed to vote?” I quickly respond with an emphatic, “NO!” Sometimes they’ll clarify. “John,” they’ll say, “I mean really little children, like between the ages of 3 and 5, should they be allowed to vote?” To which I respond, “I understood your question the first time. My answer is still no.”

At last count, the number of people who have asked me this question is zero. That’s a shame because I sincerely believe the country would benefit from my policy ideas. If we denied children the right to vote, elections would be about selecting leaders based on their political ideology rather than childish concerns like friendliness.

To my consternation, children are allowed to participate in the election process even as they flagrantly admit they don’t comprehend the purpose of a vote. Children think their votes are like stickers to be handed out for good behavior. When someone does nice things, you vote for them. But, when someone does something bad, you take your vote away. That’s what happened when Bernie Sanders was cranky at John Konstin’s restaurant:

 Says Konstin: “It was all very nice, except for cranky Bernie [Sanders].” The Vermont senator arrived for dinner with about 15 of his team — but “he didn’t want to shake hands, he didn’t want a picture,’’ Konstin reports. “He wasn’t nice to any of the staff,’’ says the veteran restaurateur. “He lost my vote.”

Sorry, Bernie! You lost Konstin’s sticker. You don’t want to shake hands and pose for pictures? Fine! He doesn’t want you to be President. Take that, you grump!

The phrasing implies that Konstin was intending to vote for Sanders. It’s not possible to “lose” something that you don’t have. If Konstin was undecided, he would have said, “He’s not getting my vote.” That would be the grammatically correct way to express his emotionally immature sentiment.

Children are singularly interested in one group of people – themselves. They care nothing for other groups of people such as families, communities, countries and humankind. When a politician is “mean” to a child, the child will not vote for the politician. It doesn’t matter that the politician has promised to take money from “mean rich people” and give it to the child. It doesn’t matter that the politician promised the child won’t have to pay for stuff ever again. The child will not vote for grouchy people.

Ironically, Bernie Sanders base of support is composed entirely of children. Bernie’s Kids believe everything will be free when the right person becomes President. They sincerely believe that rich people have huge stacks of money that they keep locked up in vaults so they don’t have to share it with anybody. These kids will happily give their vote to literally anyone who says they’ll punish rich people for being greedy (and mean).

John Konstin is now actively searching for a candidate who’s nice enough to deserve his vote. My guess is that Elizabeth Warren is just a smile away from getting his sticker. Satan could bring 15 of his staff into Konstin’s bar and secure a vote if he posed for pictures and shook some hands.

I like children. I just don’t think they should be voting. It would be better to let chickens vote than children. A chicken wouldn’t fall for Lucifer’s promises. A chicken wouldn’t get its feelings hurt by momentary grouchiness. Chickens votes would be completely random which is much more likely to preserve our republic than counting the votes of millions of reckless, selfish, babies. Chickens wouldn’t intentionally vote for Satan. Children would.

You gonna keep lurking forever or are you gonna join this exclusive clique?
Stop procrastinating. Click This.

Leave a comment

One Response

Dive into the discussion...

Archives
Subscribe to Blog via Email

Get my blog in your inbox!

Follow

Get the latest posts delivered to your mailbox:

Your Cart