The world refuses to lower the voting age to 16, but only just: 57 % no against 43 % yes, with nobody abstaining from an opinion. On an institutional question, that total absence of hesitation is notable. Everyone has made up their mind.
Gender separates sharply: men reject the idea unanimously, while women are far more divided, with a substantial minority in favour.
Age produces the paradox of the day. The 18-to-24s, who have only just gained the right, are mostly against granting it earlier. The 25-34s and the over-65s oppose it too. The only clear support comes from the 45-54 bracket, unanimously in favour.
The debate tilts even more heavily towards refusal. The central argument is maturity: at 18 you grasp the stakes better, and that age coincides with legal adulthood and the full set of rights and responsibilities that come with it. One voice goes further, judging even 18 premature so long as you have not stepped out of your parents' influence.
Two subtler objections round out the majority camp. The first refuses to let democracy become a confrontation between generations each defending its own interests, rather than a space where every citizen builds a shared future. The second warns about younger voters' heightened exposure to the influence of those around them and of social media.
The « yes » camp fits into a single contribution, but a direct one: at 16 you can already drive, live alone and carry responsibilities; thinking critically about politics is well within reach, and greater youth involvement would benefit political life. It is the only argument in the thread that speaks of what the vote would bring rather than what it would risk.