From: no_offline_contact@example.com   
      
   On 2026-02-12 3:48 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:   
   > On Feb 12, 2026 at 12:37:52 PM PST, "Rhino"    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 2026-02-12 2:20 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:   
   >>>   On Feb 12, 2026 at 10:27:30 AM PST, "Rhino"    
   >>>   wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>   Jacob Rees-Mogg shares his thoughts on a Labour initiative to lower the   
   >>>>   voting age in the UK to 16. As usual, he makes a number of very good   
   >>>>   points that challenge the wisdom of lowering the voting age to 16 from   
   >>>>   18 but also sees some potential benefits.   
   >>>   
   >>>   Sixteen is the conservative approach. I've seen some UK politicians who   
   are   
   >>>   advocating for 14.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >> The thing is that this move is clearly and obviously because Labour   
   >> thinks they'll get the votes of the newly enfranchised voters. As   
   >> Rees-Mogg points out, this is was what the polls showed a couple of   
   >> years ago when Labour put that idea in its manifesto but *current* polls   
   >> show that people in that age group would split their votes between   
   >> Reform, Labour's arch-rival on the right, and the Greens, Labour's   
   >> arch-rival on the left. If enacted into law, this measure is more likely   
   >> to hurt them than help them! Virtually *everyone* now despises Labour   
   >> and they will lose very VERY badly in the local elections and in the   
   >> next national elections when they finally get held - unless, of course,   
   >> Reform screws up REALLY badly in the meantime.   
   >>   
   >> The pundits have already counted 13 instances where Labour tried to   
   >> enact a policy in line with their manifesto and then had to back away   
   >> from it; they're calling these events U-turns. I predict this will be   
   >> yet another U-turn.   
   >   
   > Changing the voter base in order to cheat in elections is a typically   
   > 3rd-world move. Let's apply the maxim: "Import the 3rd world and you get the   
   > 3rd-world" and see if that applies to the UK.   
   >   
   > Oh, wow! Look at that. It lines up perfectly. The UK has been importing the   
   > 3rd-world for a decade or so and now they have a government using 3rd-world   
   > election-rigging tactics to stay in power.   
   >   
   >   
   Actually, major levels of immigrations started under Tony Blair, first   
   elected in 1997. Before that, when they were in Opposition under Maggie   
   Thatcher and then John Major, they had pushed for multiculturalism but   
   had met with significant resistance. When they got into power, they   
   decided to increase immigration dramatically. One of the Labour leaders   
   actually got caught saying that it was time to rub the Tories   
   (Conservatives) noses in their hostility to large-scale immigration!   
      
   One of the many consequences of their policies has been to alienate a   
   key part of their base, the unionized workers, who had long been vocal   
   Labour supporters. (Some British ridings have been Labour since 1918   
   without a break and some British voters are 5th-generation Labour   
   supporters with EVERYONE in their family voting Labour for five solid   
   generations.) But given the decline of the British economy, most of the   
   union members have deserted Labour and are either gravitating to the   
   Greens or to Reform.   
      
   --   
   Rhino   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)