We already have age limits at the lower end. Why are people so against age limits at the upper end?
Eh, frankly, I’m not a big fan of age limits or term limits, I think they’re fundamentally undemocratic. If people in a state keep electing someone then it is their right to do so.
Banning people over a certain age or who have served a certain amount of terms doesn’t solve the core issue in such circumstances, that being gerrymandering, voter suppression, and wide spread misinformation and disinformation spread by bad actors. There are plenty of old representatives and senators who I have endless respect and trust for, and it would really be a shame if they were forced to leave office just because they hit some arbitrary number of years or terms.
The Constitution says that a person can’t be under 30 to serve in the Senate. Is that saying that there aren’t any sub-30 year olds who would be great Senators? Why is one arbitrary limit OK, but one on the other end of the range suddenly undemocratic? That just makes no sense to me.
I don’t think they agree with that lower limit either. They didn’t say anything to make me think it’s not included in the age limits they’re talking about.
We already have age limits at the lower end. Why are people so against age limits at the upper end?
Probably because some people age better than others? I’d argue term limits are probably a better solution to this problem. Although, people could also have the courtesy of resigning when they’re clearly too old for the job.
Frankly, I oppose term limits as well, if people want to keep electing a politician they like, they should be able to, and it’s really anti-democracy to insist they have to pick someone new after an arbitrary amount of time.
The issues with bad politicians are not coming from them being allowed to keep running, it’s that the systems around elections are so broken that bad politicians can keep winning.
This is exactly it. We need to move past first-past-the-post voting and do something like ranked-choice.
I’d say we need to go one further than ranked choice to multi member districts with ranked choice voting, that way even those groups who aren’t a majority still get represented but larger groups get a roughly proportional amount of representation.
Interesting, this is the first time I heard of multi-member districts but it makes a lot of sense. I’d certainly be in support of them.
I really like them because they would solve a lot of the issues around minority representation.
Some people also young better than others, though. There are 18 year olds in the world I’ve have no problem voting for, if I could.
But yeah, a lot of age limit sentiment seems to be just straight up just ageism to me, as if every person becomes senile as soon as they turn 80, or even just 70 or 60, which just isn’t remotely true. Intelligence can remain sharp as ever, and sometimes elderly wisdom is indeed a thing. And every politician is surrounded by aids who will notice if something starts to go wrong.
I’d be sort of okay with a very high age limit, like 90, I guess, but on the whole I agree term limits are better anyway.
I disagree, even if you’re not senile you should be moving out of the way for younger generations. Wisdom doesn’t count for much if you’re completely out of touch with modern problems (see climate change, LGBTQ+ rights, “series of tubes” guy). Part of the reason millennials have been infantilized and poor for so long is that boomers won’t relinquish power in government or business.
There are plenty of older politicians who have good stances on those issues, and plenty of younger politicians with abhorrent views.
Sure, older politicians are more likely to have outdated views, but if the voters oppose those views than they should vote them out.
The issue of so many politicians being old and out of touch with the values of the citizens is merely a symptom of large problems in the electoral process and those issues would persist even if all the legislators had to be young.
The devil came to collect his soul earlier than was scheduled
That’s so weird that he came back. God that looked like a stroke.
If it were any other situation he’d be going to the hospital immediately. That’s definitely either a stroke or a seizure and he needs a CT or MRI ASAP.
However, the optics of him freezing like that and then getting rushed to the hospital are bad, even worse than him looking like a wax sculpture and freezing, so he came back to say he’s okay. Then he goes to the hospital, but they drive him around the block a few times before arriving to throw off the press.
He could just have Parkinson’s and it’s not public knowledge.
We aren’t really doctors and not really able to diagnose someone based on a clip.
McConnell is a liar and has done a lot of harm to the US. He and many others like him should have retired many years ago.
I"m old too. I will retire from my job at retirement age. Other people could use the job opening I’d leave.
And I think Trump is a criminal/liar and too old to run for president. And Biden is just too old to run. Looks like I’ll be forced to vote for Biden because he doesn’t know when to bow out gracfully.
<This post was all over the place> McConnell is too old and needs to retire. Back on topic!
Looks like I’ll be forced to vote for Biden because he doesn’t know when to bow out gracfully.
Is there another well enough known (and well supported within the party) Democrat candidate who could have a reasonable chance to beat the orange sack of shit at this point in time?
Unless I’m mistaken, we got Biden or RFK. Between the two, I’d go for Biden any day.
lmao rfk is a fucking idiot of gigantic proportions.
RFK is a science denier and republican’s donate to him to pull votes away from Biden.
Even RFK’s family thinks he is an idiot and say please don’t vote for him.
RFK talks crazy too.
