You claimed that they see a single source and are just satisfied based on the existence of any paper. That is not an accurate or justified interpretation of their statement.
Studies suggesting something don't definitively prove it, sure, because, as you say, contrary evidence can exist. But no one claimed that - they just said studies "back it up". This is true. Studies can indeed "back up" claims.
You sure changed your tune quick! What happened to this not being likely? What happened to it being pointless to block voting for criminals because they simply wouldn't be that silly?
I believe in democracy. But I also believe in education - and you guys over there in the US aren't good at either of those things. You have a corrupt, shambolic democracy and a failing education system that churns out dumb, blind followers to feed it.
It's not a strawman. You think a minimum age is "pointless" because "no one would actually vote for a child". I transplanted that exact argument into a situation I knew would showcase its absurdity.
Proving you wrong isn't a fallacy!
Democracy requires majorities of people to do anything.
Majorities can be misled. Surely you're aware of this?
A few people voting for nonsense options doesnt do anything.
It's not "a few people" though. Trump is actively and increasingly popular despite his obvious crimes.
A few people murdering actually kills people.
A bloc of fanatics actually gets their way when organised. That's democracy.
If youre worried a majority of people will choose a nonsense option, well then you dont believe in democracy anymore.
Now that's a fallacy - A false dichotomy, AKA a black and white fallacy.
Try harder, dear.