Current Events > Anyone older than avg life expectancy shouldnt be able to run for president

(+) Yeah! (+)

Agree (minus exception for Bernie)

No, I think people that believe in magical and supernatural fantasy like gods, ghosts, and cryptids should be unable to run for President.

It should be limited to 18-45 and born citizenship requirement removed.

No, I don't support ageist restrictions. If voters want to vote for a geezer, then they should be allowed to.

And, to be clear, I'm in favor of a constitutional amendment to remove minimum age requirements for candidates as well.

Why TC?

MarshMellow posted...

It should be limited to 18-45 and born citizenship requirement removed.

You can't be serious with that age group

Discrimination is okay as long as it's targeted toward groups you disapprove of? Is that what you're getting at here?

emblem-man posted...

Why TC?

Theres a few reasons. Biggest probably being why should old people who arent gonna have to live with their decisions be making decisions for everyone that is going to actually be alive?

K181 posted...

No, I don't support ageist restrictions. If voters want to vote for a geezer, then they should be allowed to.

And, to be clear, I'm in favor of a constitutional amendment to remove minimum age requirements for candidates as well.

nobody 25 should be president, dude. period.

an old geezer that cannot coherently string words together to make a sentence should not be given the opportunity to run america.

What about the voters?

0 to 17 year olds can't vote. Why not?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_age#Maximum_voting_age

http://profs-polisci.mcgill.ca/muniz/intergen/Van%20Parijs%20-%20Disenfranchisement%20of%20the%20elderly.pdf

No, that doesn't make any sense. As long as they can pass a medical check and mental assessment, I don't see why age really matters.

WalkingPlague posted...

nobody 25 should be president, dude. period.

Voters should be the judge of that.

an old geezer that cannot coherently string words together to make a sentence should not be given the opportunity to run america.

Voters should be the judge of that.

K181 posted...

Voters should be the judge of that.

Voters should be the judge of that.

This basically.

Solid agree.

Being 34 and running for president is a major no no but being 81 and building a streak of mistaking european leaders for dead predecessors is perfectly fine

The same arguments can apply to term limits.

Why not allow The People to vote for who they want.

(Because there are other considerations?)

I think we need to prioritze.

Before we start disqualifying based on age, can we at least disqualify on whether or not you planned an insurrection to stay in power?

Notti posted...

What about the voters?

0 to 17 year olds can't vote. Why not?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_age#Maximum_voting_age

http://profs-polisci.mcgill.ca/muniz/intergen/Van%20Parijs%20-%20Disenfranchisement%20of%20the%20elderly.pdf

I'm in favor of lowering voting ages, too. As for how low, that can clearly be up for debate, but I support reducing to 16, which is also when most teenagers get over the table jobs and start paying taxes.

As for why we have any restriction at all on voting age, it basically boils down to establishing an age of where it is acceptable that a citizen is independently minded enough to have a political voice of their own. Give babies and toddlers the franchise, and you're just giving a parent an extra vote, after all.

Could there be an argument for younger than sixteen? Sure, but how much lower is certainly up for debate.

Dragon56 posted...

Being 34 and running for president is a major no no but being 81 and building a streak of mistaking european leaders for dead predecessors is perfectly fine

It might blow your mind, but a lot of people who are against age discrimination against old people are also against it for young people.

I think 18 is a fine cutoff for basically anything, personally.

solosnake posted...

Theres a few reasons. Biggest probably being why should old people who arent gonna have to live with their decisions be making decisions for everyone that is going to actually be alive?

Can't say I agree. Hell, I don't even think people saying this actually believe it.

Like, someone could use your same argument as a reason why childless people shouldn't be President.

I think people just have a weird dislike of people "looking" old when it comes to the presidency

MarshMellow posted...

It should be limited to 18-45 and born citizenship requirement removed.

You know Obama was 47 when he went into office right?

30-55 imo. Old enough to get real life experience, not old enough to be behind the times

Squall28 posted...

30-55 imo. Old enough to get real life experience, not old enough to be behind the times

Bro I'm 33 and feel like I'm behind the times.

Voters are the ones who put these old people in charge. Why should your personal opinion about someone being "too old" override the process as it currently exists?

If you want younger people in office, then vote for them and contribute to their campaigns. You can't just ban everybody who doesn't suit your personal preference for president.

Contrary to some of the opinions I've seen on this board over the years, old people are people too. Sure, a 70 year old man might seem super old to you, but he might still have 20+ good functioning years left in him. Acting like old people should just sit around waiting to die simply because they pass an arbitrary age is utterly out of touch.

emblem-man posted...

Can't say I agree. Hell, I don't even think people saying this actually believe it.

Like, someone could use your same argument as a reason why childless people shouldn't be President.

I think people just have a weird dislike of people "looking" old when it comes to the presidency

Getting new blood into politics can only be a good thing in my mind. Look at our current situation Full of old people who have been entrenched in party politics for so long that the entire thing has turned into a circus. Imagine if half these people werent allowed to be in office anymore.

I think if someone has good policies they should be able to run regardless of age. The issue is stupid idiots vote for conservatives and ruin countries

35-70 is a good range imo. Retire and spend time with your families. This Biden trump election is low key bordering on elder abuse throwing them out there and people actually wanting it

Rika_Furude posted...

I think if someone has good policies they should be able to run regardless of age.

Let them be an advisor then

the_crow13 posted...

This Biden trump election is low key bordering on elder abuse throwing them out there and people actually wanting it

They're adults who can make their own decisions. Why are you acting like older people don't have a mind of their own?

solosnake posted...

Getting new blood into politics can only be a good thing in my mind. Look at our current situation Full of old people who have been entrenched in party politics for so long that the entire thing has turned into a circus. Imagine if half these people werent allowed to be in office anymore.

The GOP house members has lots of new young people over the past few years...they're all fucking maga idiots.

I get your overall point, but I don't hold the opinion that younger blood necessarily means better politician. Young people can have just as stupid of a political opinion as older ones.

A party should build up a younger cohort as a general rule and the Democrats have failed at that in past years, but I really don't care if they're young or old, as long as I like their politics.

Gobstoppers12 posted...

They're adults who can make their own decisions. Why are you acting like older people don't have a mind of their own?

The ageism from some people is quite insane tbh

No. It's anti Democratic and discriminatory. I don't support a lower limit either.

Besides, the younger politicians do not give me confidence that they would be any better.

Age is said to bring wisdom.

But it also brings mental disease.

And it also brings greed. As the older you are, the more you aquire. (Your properties, your companies, your stocks, your friends, your nepotism) And the more you want to NIMBY things to your advantage.

Maximum age should be 65 at most, preferably lower.

Dragon56 posted...

Agree (minus exception for Bernie)

Oh God shut up

If we can't have a maximum age, then abolish the minimum age

We can discriminate against 32 year olds but not 82 year olds?

emblem-man posted...

The ageism from some people is quite insane tbh

So should we let 18 year olds run for president or pretend it's a good idea to have someone that young?

Stop.

hockeybabe89 posted...

If we can't have a maximum age, then abolish the minimum age

We can discriminate against 32 year olds but not 82 year olds?

Apparently yes. We're not allowed to point out the hypocrisy.

A floating age cap that can drop below the age minimum if things go really badly is a terrible idea.

emblem-man posted...

The ageism from some people is quite insane tbh

There's a difference between 60 years old old
And barely alive old

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/b/b76db27b.jpg

You should not be allowed to enact policy that you will not be alive to see the consequences of

hockeybabe89 posted...

If we can't have a maximum age, then abolish the minimum age

We can discriminate against 32 year olds but not 82 year olds?

I understand the minimum age as an argument of experience, similarly to why I understand we put legal limits on age for sexual consent. Decline from age varies wildly, and it doesn't make sense to bar everyone on that basis.

I'd go further and restrict it to at least 10 years younger than avg life expectancy at election date.

Yeah, there should be a maximum age for government officials across the board. Even setting it high at 80 to prevent another wheelchair-bound, barely cognizant puppet from being wheeled around would be better than nothing.

No politician of any age is guided by their lifespan. It's the electoral cycles that they worry about.

K181 posted...

Voters should be the judge of that.

I don't agree with this at all.

A country needs laws to keep incoherent, senile, and juvenile away from the most powerful position in the country.

There definitely should be bare minimum baseline, standards of letting someone be the president.

LightningThief posted...

I don't agree with this at all.

A country needs laws to keep incoherent, senile, and juvenile away from the most powerful position in the country.

There definitely should be bare minimum baseline, standards of letting someone be the president.

Then have a law saying that those suffering from senility cannot run for office, rather than just excluding anyone over a certain age in case they get dementia.

Early onset is a thing too.

Garioshi posted...

You should not be allowed to enact policy that you will not be alive to see the consequences of

I say we go even further. You should not be allowed to enact policy that your children will not see the consequences of. If you have no children, no policy power for you.

/S if it wasn't obvious

ai123 posted...

Then have a law saying that those suffering from senility cannot run for office, rather than just excluding anyone over a certain age in case they get dementia.

Early onset is a thing too.

I agree, that's why I said incoherent and senile.

But on the opposite end of the spectrum I definitely couldn't go along with a fresh out of high school 18 or 20 year old as president either.