The right to vote is a cornerstone right that is essential to a well-functioning democracy.  This idea was enshrined both in the Declaration of Independence and in the Constitution and is protected by five separate amendments.

But every single right comes with responsibilities, and the greater the right, the greater the responsibilities.  The outcomes of elections shape a political course for the nation and fundamentally affect the lives of every American.  That is why it is so troubling to hear Democrats' fallacious propositions to alter voting rights.

Their main idea is to expand voting rights to new population groups.  Recently, they proposed to grant voting rights to 16-year-olds.  "I myself have always been for lowering the voting age to 16," speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said.  "I think it's really important to capture kids when they're in high school, when they're interested in all of this, when they're learning about government, to be able to vote."  Oh, sure, Nancy — you would like to capture them, all right.

Have you ever wondered what the reason is for a long list of age-related legal restrictions?  All of them are based on the stages of physical and psychological development of a person, including the natural development of the human brain.  Undoubtedly, there are lots of smart teenagers out there scoring sky-high on SATs and ACTs.  The fact is, it doesn't matter when it comes to good judgment — it is something they can't excel in yet, because the rational part of the brain isn't fully developed until age 25 or so.

Also, recent research has found that adult and teen brains work differently.  Adults think with the prefrontal cortex, the brain's rational part.  This is the part of the brain that responds to situations with awareness of long-term consequences.  Teens process information with the amygdala, which is the emotional part responsible for immediate reactions, including fear and aggression.  All of these facts are from the realm of science — something Democrats seem to have declared war on.  But I honestly believe that the top Democrats are extremely intelligent people and know exactly what they are doing.  Considering a rapid radicalization of the Democratic agenda and overall political style that dismisses basic knowledge of government, economy, and social issues with a simultaneous raise of violent methods of political struggle, American teenagers are undoubtedly a group that Democrats would die to "capture" as the energetic voters — and fighters — that tend to be idealistic and easily manipulated with the emotional arguments that picture a perfect world of a common well-being and absolute kumbaya. Then just point at the enemy who stands between them and the socialist paradise — and the enemy will be torn apart.  (The "enemy" is easily recognized by the red hat.)

The other group that clearly should be refused voting rights — at least for those who have their prefrontal cortex fully developed — are non-citizens.  For if a person does not owe any allegiance to a country, why should he decide on that country's course?  Isn't it also obvious that letting non-citizens and illegal aliens to vote encourages them not to legalize their status and stimulates others to come to this oh, so liberal country to take advantage of its generosity?  Again, it is somehow hard to imagine that all of those Democratic U.S. representatives who opposed a legislative measure condemning voting in U.S. elections by illegal aliens do not understand the consequences of non-citizens executing voting rights.  They say illegal aliens are a "part of our community" and therefore should have their say.  Nice.  So if my neighbors decide to live on my backyard, should I invite them to decide on my family budget, or should I call the police?  Should 11 million illegals cast their vote just as law-abiding citizens, enjoying the rights and benefits of being Americans — without any obligations and duties to the countries?  How fair is that?  It certainly seems fair to the House Democrats — as long as they get those votes blue.

In a continuation of the perverted logic "the lives of illegals are affected by the results of elections, and therefore they should participate" may be stretched to absolute nonsense, and it already has been.  "America should allow other countries to vote in the 2020 elections," runs the Independent.  "This is a country which calls itself 'leader of the Free World' and has huge global influence in terms of foreign policy and economics.  Now that Trump won't acknowledge basic things like climate change, it's time other countries had a say," claims the author.  As absurd as it sounds, the globalized world order without borders, governed by the supranational institutions, where state sovereignty goes obsolete, is a fundamental leftist belief.  It is nothing but a slightly transformed idea of a stateless communism conceptualized by Karl Marx.  All of this has nothing to do with the people's true interests, but only aims at the absolute power.

Where else can we find our voters? muse the leftists.  Ah, but behind bars, among the 6.1 million felons!  "You're paying a price, you committed a crime, you're in jail.  That's bad," believes proud socialist Bernie Sanders.  "But you're still living in American society and you have a right to vote."  One of the provisions of the so-called "For the People Act," a bill proposed by the House Democrats, is luckily not as radical as the one that has been just voiced by Bernie.  It would allow felons to vote only after they leave prison.  It is not the first desperate attempt of the Democrats to swing elections in their favor at the cost of felons' votes.  In dramatic 2016, Virginia's Governor Terry McAuliffe took executive action to restore voting rights to at least 173,000 ex-felons.  At the same time, New York's Governor Andrew Cuomo signed an executive order to restore voting rights to felons on parole.

Now, I'm not arguing that the voting rights of those who have already served their time should not be redeemed at all.  Restoring voting rights is one of the mechanisms of reintegration of inmates back into society.  Here, the Democrats are doing a good deed for bad reasons.

Overall, the Democrats' attempts to expand their voter base by introducing new legal groups of voters instead of re-engaging with the existing ones indicate their inability to promote their agenda in the "era of Trump," as they call it.  When the policy that finally "puts America first" bears fruit, when economy is on the rise, and people can actually experience the benefits of it, what can you possibly offer in its place?  Nothing rational, of course — rather, lies and deception while searching for supporters.