> About two-thirds of voters ages 18 to 24 (66%) associate with the Democratic Party, compared with 34% who align with the GOP.
> About six-in-ten voters 80 and older (58%) identify with or lean toward the GOP, while 39% associate with the Democratic Party.
> How does voting behavior differ by age?
> In 2024, 47.7% of citizens between the ages of 18 and 24 voted, compared to 60.2% of 25- to 44-year-olds, 70.0% of 45- to 64-year-olds, and 74.7% of people 65 and older.
Older voters have higher turnout and skew heavily Republican.
Older voters didn't vote for war with Iran. Some will go along with the president for tribal reasons and what's left of american patriotism.
Defining things generationally is unnecessarily divisive: the people who have been relentlessly pushing for war with iran have names and addresses and have been doing so for 30 years.
I don't think you can not address it "generationally" The people who voted are absolutely getting what they voted for. None of this was not predicted before and during the election. I remember reading years ago that Trump wanted his second term to do the wanton things he couldn't before (like bludgeoning countries with the military). It was all out there.
It's past time to stop blaming a few warhawks "over there" Voters did this. Voters need to fix it
At some point you were part of that group that you are labeling a mistake. At another point, your children are or will be if you have any. Locking all of these productivity tools in one generation is a recipe for failure. You should think outside the box that you are currently trapped in.
Yes it does. So does my old HP-11C calculator I used to write the first programs, in RPN for oil well log analysis, that I ever wrote outside of a class assignment.
All of those routines were reprogrammed originally in a flavor of BASIC and it soon became obvious that ASCII log displays from digitized published materials were marginally useful as interpretation tools. Tabular data was far too dense. We needed pictures. Therefore we chased graphical methods of displaying data leading us to C and then C++ for the graphical routines that made it easy to display all of the data from an oil well log and to scroll the logs while zooming in and out.
We started all that in some flavor of DOS and as time went by and everyone dumped their latest OS incarnation, we moved thru MS-DOS, PC-DOS, DR-DOS, etc until MS finally got with the GUI environment plan like Apple's Mac and produced a near worthless GUI called Win386 and later Win95. For a time it was fun.
Linux, the old new kid on the block, still works great from the command line too. The GUI exists to streamline some of the things that are more easily digested in graphical formats. It has nothing to do with anyone's intelligence or ability to pick up skills they don't have today.
It’s not wild. Anyone with brains would think it is irresponsible to keep your secret token for publishing public release binaries accessible in your automation.
please believe that I'm trying to be constructive and helpful with this response: the way that you phrased your question means that you ignorant about the legal basis for federal policing and federal criminal prosecution in America. Please consider studying this topic before commenting on it.
No they haven't. Police forces' power goes through actual Courts that enforce Constitutional rights above police authority.
ICE/Border Patrol's authority comes through civil law and non-Article III 'immigration' court. Congress explicitly authorized ICE to be something else when they placed ICE in an alternative 'civil law'/immigration system hoping to make them not have to follow the burdens placed on Police/Justice/Judges/Courts by the Constitution.
The police enforces civil law just as same as criminal law. For example, most traffic infractions are civil and don't go "through actual Courts". 'Traffic' court is not an Article 3 court. The funny thing is that a short while ago the same people that demand criminal process for illegal aliens now could not stop themselves from mentioning that immigration infractions are civil, same as traffic violations. So it's not some obscure knowledge for the left...
Do police arrests/detainments go through traffic court? Ice's day to day, reason for existing role goes through the equivalent of traffic court, not actual court with real judges putting them more on the level of meter maid than Police.
>Do police arrests/detainments go through traffic court?
I assume you meant "arrest warrants" because most arrests don't go through any court, the police employs sworn officers (same as ICE and other feds) who have a power to arrest upon a reasonable suspicion. And the police can and does serve administrative arrest warrants. I suppose those are rare from traffic courts but common from parole boards, for example.
I think I figured what your problem is. You have the whole process backwards. It's not the judge who orders the police around to catch criminals. The police catches criminals and gives them to the DA, who may bring them to court and ask a judge for a conviction. The police does not interact with courts other than testifying or serving warrants, its day-to-day business does not involve courts.
if you mean "ICE agents (as sworn federal agents) are not authorized by statue to arrest people for federal crimes, like entering the US illegally" you are simply wrong.
ICE agents, specifically those in Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) under U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), are federal law enforcement officers with statutory authority to arrest individuals for immigration violations, including criminal offenses such as illegal entry into the United States under 8 U.S.C. § 1325 and § 1327.
It is true that many immigration violations are administrative in nature but it doesn't follow that ICE are not police, nor are they not sworn to enforce all federal laws.
If I mean that ICE operates under Immigration courts which are not real/Article III courts and that these courts skirt Constitutional rights on the claim that they are civil, not criminal, than I am, in fact, 100% correct and that ICE are not acting as Police in their main, day to day, purpose for existing capacity.
Why are ICEs training programs so significantly shorter than other law enforcement? Especially if ICE's training covers immigration enforcement and Federal law enforcement training? Shouldn't that make it longer, not significantly shorter? Can an ICE agent transfer to another Federal position (say DC Police) without having a requirement that they take ACTUAL law enforcement training?
reply