this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2023
1511 points (98.2% liked)

politics

19248 readers
2175 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Over three-fourths of Americans think there should be a maximum age limit for elected officials, according to a CBS News/YouGov survey.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kava 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Will that really change if we added age limits? They'll just pick a successor and people will mindlessly vote for the new candidate instead.

We all know the Bidens, McConnells, Pelosi's, etc aren't really a single person. They have a whole team of people behind them who are making the decisions, doing the research, etc. You're not really voting for the person as much as the administration that comes with that person.

For example a lot of people that were part of the Obama administration are part of the Biden. The person changed but the power structure more or less remains the same.

[–] UFO64 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It would be a step in the right direction.

Something doesn't need to be perfect to be better than we have today.

If we have a minimum age, we can have a maximum.

[–] kava 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or it's a step in no direction and doesn't actually do anything. Realistically a step in no direction is a step in the wrong direction because of opportunity cost - time spent that could have been spent doing something useful.

The idea behind a minimum age is that there is a certain experience that you get as you age. 25 year olds simply don't have it. A max limit doesn't make sense using that reasoning - you don't lose experience as you age.

However, I agree that it's inconsistent to have one and not the other. I say remove both - let the people decide who they want to vote for.

[–] UFO64 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just because you don’t like to doesn’t make it a step in the wrong direction stranger.

You very much lose perspective with age. You nearest you to ask any of the people you listed what concerns a 25 year old they represent. I promise you they haven’t a clue.

Reasonable limits are reasonable for elected officials. I fly and we age out pilots for this very reason.

[–] kava 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You very much lose perspective with age

I'd argue the opposite. Experience gives perspective. When I was 25 the world was tiny. I could only see what was in front of my nose. I thought I knew what I was doing - I didn't.

Sure, at a certain point you lose touch with the new generations. But the leaders of this country aren't trying to make the best country for 25 year olds. They're trying to make the best country for everyone. Also, average age is about 40 iirc

[–] Impassionata 0 points 1 year ago

But the leaders of this country aren’t trying to make the best country for 25 year olds. They’re trying to make the best country for everyone.

And they're failing, because they're old, and too many of them don't believe in climate change. It's not hard. Get all the old people out immediately.

[–] Impassionata 1 points 1 year ago

It would have prevented the Trump disaster and that's really all I care about.