The People Who Run This Country Are All Too Damn Old

[Jilly_in_VA]

The average United States senator is old enough to begin drawing Social Security benefits, and in a branch where Vice President Kamala Harris is the tie-breaking vote, one unexpected illness could completely change the dynamic of American government.

A stark reminder of this fact came Tuesday, when the chief of staff to Sen. Ben Ray Luján, the 49-year-old junior Democratic senator from New Mexico, announced that Luján suffered a stroke last week and underwent surgery to decrease the swelling in his brain.

Luján is “being cared for at [University of New Mexico] hospital, resting comfortably, and expected to make a full recovery,” Carlos Sanchez, the chief of staff, said in a tweet.

On Tuesday, senators from both parties expressed their well-wishes for Luján and his family. “My hope is that we all love each other enough to just slow down, do work that we can get done that won’t be affected by his being gone and get him the hell back here when it’s safe,” said Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota told the New York Times, describing Luján as “just the nicest guy in the world.”

Democrats also expressed optimism about Luján’s recovery, Politico reported Wednesday. “He should be out pretty quickly,” Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois told the website. “It shouldn’t affect the agenda too much… the key thing is that they recognized the symptoms fairly quickly.”

The age of the government in general skews much older; at 79, President Joe Biden is the oldest president ever, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who announced last month that she’s running for re-election to the House, is 81.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgmvxb/senate-average-age-too-old
__________________________________________________________________
Luján should be fine (speaking as a former cardio/stepdown nurse). The rest, I dunno.

[maxsolomon]

1. OMG Ageism

Last edited Thu Feb 3, 2022, 01:06 PM - Edit history (1)

[LakeArenal]

3. Glad you find it entertaining.

I experienced it at 56 when I lost my job during Bush’s housing scandal.

Lost 75% of my retirement to live on and had to refinance my house twice.


Get the popcorn.

[maxsolomon]

13. Ageism is a long time DU 3rd rail.

I did not intend to offend you. It was not a personal attack, it was an reference to this topic and the DU circular firing squad that immediately forms when it's brought up.

[kirby]

6. Is it really ageism?

In a body that should ideally be representative of the nation, being filled with septuagenarians and octogenarians is a failure to be representative.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

7. And yet it is a 49-year-old who is out sick

And the seniors are being blamed...
So yes, Ageism.

[kirby]

11. I know...

Yes, when I saw this OP, I thought the same thing... the Senator who had a stroke was only 49! But I think the complaint as part of the bigger picture is valid.

Some of the Senators are even suffering dementia...

[NurseJackie]

93. Do we know how many have had myocardial infarction...

Some of the Senators are even suffering dementia...

It wouldn't surprise me. Do we know how many have had myocardial infarction... or bypass surgery... or stents... or angioplasty?

[George II]

96. Or even unexpected accidents at home.

[NurseJackie]

97. It's even worse while traveling...

... unfamiliar surroundings, not knowing where the nearest hospital or "doc-in-the-box" corner walk-in clinic is... that can be frightening and unsettling.

[Act_of_Reparation]

25. Uh, no.

Imagine now if somebody complained that the Senate was overwhelmingly white (which it is), and somebody here said some stupid shit about "reverse racism".

Because that's what you're doing right now.

[cadoman]

129. talk about undermining your lede!

I'm quite happy with our old representatives because they're fucking effective. Give me another few years of Joe/Schumer/Nancy over some erratic young thing any day.

And with advances in medicine and vaccinations, we could be looking at them living and leading us at ages over 90 or 100.

[Orrex]

38. Multimiillionare septuagenarians and octogenarians, no less

Many of them with legacy wealth and without ever in their lives having experienced the realities of living without invulnerable financial security.

[JT45242]

2. Not sure about ageism -- but it does show the perilous nature

If a Senator with a (D) were too be too ill to vote for an extended period of time, Harris wouldn't be the tie breaker the bill would have lost 49-50. If Lujan is out for an extended period of time, that will further delay the confirmation of judges, state department, and other subcabinet positions as Mitch will block everything because perceived inaction by the Democrats is the Rethuglican strategy.

Not sure how it works state to state for the immediate replacement of a Senator -- but with so many old and looking frail (Grassley, Feinstein, etc) -- who would replace the Senator might totally shift the balance of power.

[empedocles]

4. President Biden & Speaker Pelosi, are so much needed in these perilous times. Period.

[leftyladyfrommo]

68. They both have so much experuence in negotiating

and getting stuff done.

[empedocles]

69. Strong, steady, hands in dealing with the crises of the time.

[PatSeg]

123. Yes

We should be judging people on their character, abilities, and experience, not their age. I personally can't think of anyone better at this time to serve as President and Speaker of the House. We need to stop putting people in broad categories and judge them as individuals.

[hlthe2b]

5. Ageist claptrap.

[Mosby]

17. A lot of jobs have upper age limits or terms.

In Maricopa County AZ judges can only serve until 70yo.

Pilots have to retire at 65.

I don't think is ageism.

[hlthe2b]

21. And there are young people who develop early onset Alzheimers and other mental disabilities

Not to mention drug and other induced impairments. Yes, such across-the-board generalizations is ageist claptrap.

[Calculating]

28. It's literally biology

With age people grow more rigid in their thinking and less able to adapt to rapidly changing situations like we're now in.

[hlthe2b]

30. That is obnoxious stereotyping for which you should be ashamed.

I'd expect such from a RWer, but hardly a DUer.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

40. So you see no problem that the people that represent the US population

are more white, male, and older than the population?

To me, that's a problem on all 3 fronts.

[hlthe2b]

41. Since I never once mentioned race nor gender, that is YOUR projection, not mine and shame on YOU

for doing so. Those are very disingenuous tactics totally unworthy of those posting here.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

42. I said I have a problem with all 3.

Seems like, maybe, you only have a problem with 2 of those things. If you have a problem with 2, why doesn't the age representation bother you?

[Cha]

78. So do you think Sanders should

retire?

[Cuthbert Allgood]

79. Yes.

I think it's time our Congress gets less white, male, and old. I have no say over what Vermont does, of course, but, I stand behind that.

[onenote]

113. That's up to the voters, isn't it?

[Cuthbert Allgood]

122. Which is why I said "I have no say over what Vermont does"

I am merely agreeing that, as a whole, Congress and other political bodies should more accurately represent the population in demographic make up.

[Dirty Socialist]

8. Sorry, but I tend to agree

The leaders should prepare to retire soon. I won’t be for Biden in the primaries, but I will still vote for him in the general election if he is nominated

[Runningdawg]

18. Same

[Ishoutandscream2]

32. Me as well. And I'm 60

I'm a school counselor, and I have friends who I helped graduate 10, 20 years ago. I keep telling them it's time for them to get in the game.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

43. So the President is too old too

Who, pray tell, are you going to primary him with?

[Dirty Socialist]

45. I don't know yet

[Cha]

76. What Primary? PJB is POTUS and

Last edited Fri Feb 4, 2022, 06:34 PM - Edit history (1)

doing an Excellent job.

Who the hell is going to "primary" him?

Oh and that's nice you're going to vote for the Democratic Candidate for POTUS.

Should Sanders "Retire"?

[Dirty Socialist]

91. Biden probably won't be primaried

Congress folks don’t have such a stressful job. However, Sanders is almost there, IMO

[senseandsensibility]

9. He's 49.

[kcr]

10. Was the writer of the article 12 years old?

That's what they sound like when using a 49-year-old as an example of how old our rulers are.

[peggysue2]

19. LOL!!

I thought the same thing. So now a 49-year old man is considered too old? That's inferred by citing Lujan's recent stroke in an article about aging politicians, a topic that's been whipped to death.

Sloppy writing, IMHO. Or a writer who didn't have anything to write about but needed to fill up space.

[RobinA]

26. I Know, Right?

How much younger should people running the country be? God knows, I don't want 100 30-somethings running the place, and I was thirty once myself. I think you need a mixture of younger and older in chrage.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

44. Well, it is from a site founded by the leader of the Proud Boys...

[Tickle]

64. 🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️

The things that people say. I have never insulted a post before but…

[GoCubsGo]

12. Madison Cawthorn.

'Nuff said. He's the youngest person in Congress. He's also one of the biggest fucking morons on the planet. I'd rather have a government full of Nancy Pelosis than one of this cretin in it.

[sinkingfeeling]

14. +100

[chowder66]

35. +1

[ElementaryPenguin]

50. + another 1

[Bucky]

67. In the previous Congress, AoC was the youngest Representative.

Basing arguments on a single data point is pretty flawed... as your one single post absolutely proves.

[GoCubsGo]

70. Two data points, actually.

[Bucky]

88. That's cute, but you didn't follow the logic of the statements

As referring to people using Madison Cawthorne as a single data point. 🤍🤎?️💙💜💛💚🖤🧡

[yaesu]

15. I'm always happy to see the younger generation take over the roles of elders, this takes time

and our political system is wired for loooooong duration political careers. I'm not in favor of term limits but I am in favor of getting money out of politics which would weed out a lot of the less than desirable crowd, older or younger.

[highplainsdem]

16. BS. What's important is health, not age. Older people who are healthy and have

taken care of themselves are perfectly capable of leading, and their experience is invaluable.

[chowder66]

36. +1

[Cha]

77. Exactly Dem!

Thank You!

[Blue_Adept]

20. The senate has always been viewed as being about the "elder statesmen"

And being the brake on the house so that progress doesn't go so fast so as to upend a complicated and fractured, regional nation.

It's the push and pull of democracy, and an important one.

[Calculating]

22. How well does it seem to be working lately?

Seems like not much gets done and our government has extremely low approval.

[Blue_Adept]

23. The age of senators is not what's causing the problem

[Calculating]

27. Oh really?

They keep getting progressively older than ever before and our government has been getting progressively less competent.

[JustAnotherGen]

56. Its my generation

Gen X on the Republican side of the aisle.

Hawley and MTG come to mind. Lots of folks in their 40's up to late 50's come to mind.

Stunted development ditto heads.

[Calculating]

24. It's actually a major problem on a number of levels

1-Important progressive justice issues like God forbid rescheduling/legalizing cannabis at the federal level get little traction because the government is filled with 80 year olds who grew up watching reefer madness. Something like 70+% of the population want this done, why is it seemingly impossible at the federal level?
2-Our leaders are out of touch with the general population on things like inflation and housing prices. How would a bunch of wealthy 70-80 year olds feel for the 20-30 year olds who have little hope of home ownership due to runaway inflation?
3-They have no stake in the game anymore. Why care about climate change or any of the serious issues we have going forward when you're gonna be dead in less than 10 years.

[Evergreen Emerald]

29. Matt Gaetz. M. Taylor Green. Younger than Pelosi

Would not trade her for the world.

[madinmaryland]

34. Don't for Bobo from Colorado.

[progressoid]

89. You're pitting right wing against left wing rather than young vs old.

How about AOC or Ayanna Pressley vs Pelosi?

Oh wait, they already beat out elder Democrats.

[Klaralven]

31. I'd prefer term limits - 3 terms in the Senate and 6 in the House.

[Jilly_in_VA]

33. I tend to agree with you

And how about the Supreme Court? Let's talk about THAT!

[NurseJackie]

63. I'd prefer term limits in the Supreme Court... let's start there first.

[TexasBushwhacker]

72. That actually makes more sense

I don't believe in term limits for elected officials because their constituencies have the opportunity to reelect them, or not, every term.

But for appointed positions, term limits make sense. The Director of the FBI is normally a 10 year term. Why wouldn't that be good enough for SCOTUS?

[nini]

37. 49 is old?

Good Lord.

[wellst0nev0ter]

52. The writer addressed this

As the relatively young Luján’s health scare showed, however, anything can happen to anyone—and if you happen to be a U.S. senator, that could have major consequences for the entire federal government.

Sen. Jon Tester, a Montana Democrat, expressed shock at Luján’s stroke Tuesday. “It makes me worried about him,” Tester told Politico. “He’s too young for that stuff.”

And given the relative age of Democratic senators, we are really rolling the dice here. RBG inexplicably gambled by refusing to retire during Obama's term, and we are all now suffering the loss with the 6-3 wingnut court.

[NurseJackie]

60. No, it was no "inexplicable". 🙄

What a ridiculous assertion.

[wellst0nev0ter]

82. Can you specify which part was "ridiculous"

instead of engaging in no-context broadsides?

[NurseJackie]

83. Think about it for a minute... it'll come to you.

Can you specify which part was "ridiculous"

Think about it for a minute... it'll come to you.

instead of engaging in no-context broadsides?

Nobody has done that.

[wellst0nev0ter]

84. Okay, so you can't elaborate

That's fine too. Hope you enjoy the rest of your day

[NurseJackie]

85. No elaboration needed. You made only one assertion.

One need only to read your original post. Do that, and you'll have the answer to your own question.

[wellst0nev0ter]

86. Not adding anything is certainly a choice

take care

[NurseJackie]

92. Being astute and knowing when nothing needs to be "added" is a virtue.

Not adding anything is certainly a choice

Being astute and knowing when nothing needs to be "added" is a virtue. No elaboration was necessary when the point I was making is so obvious. I believe that reasonably intelligent readers would understand what I said and could take my point quite easily (thank you very much.) However, if there were any other readers who had difficulty in understanding what I was saying, then that's really not my problem.

[wellst0nev0ter]

98. That only makes sense if people are mindreaders

As you say, explaining yourself is not your problem, and neither will it be mine. Good night

[Jose Garcia]

39. Too many old politicians, but it was the young guy who had a stroke

[hamsterjill]

46. It's the young ones who can get hit by a bus, too

I see and accept the point in the OP, but life is never guaranteed regardless of age.

[brooklynite]

47. A medical condition of a 49-year old is a "stark reminder"?

[Hortensis]

48. Overall, old people are smarter and better citizens than young. We should be.

Yes, it's a damned shame more younger people aren't more responsible. Many are very smart and could make good decisions. But until more get the idea that how they vote really matters and they're supposed to inform themselves, the demo as a whole is also potentially dangerous and vulnerable to manipulation.

Anyone forgot the crowds of mostly young people who cheered the LW populist leader? The one who had no idea how he would fulfill his campaign promises -- except that people across the nation would threaten the representatives they'd just elected if they didn't fall in line support our first "legislating president"? Just slightly anti-democratic? Not a problem for those. Like the hoodlums who came to take take over, and even tried to riot at, state conventions even though some of them hadn't bothered to register to vote before arriving, and some weren't even from those states? Who needs law when you have a righteous mob?

The ones who threw the progressive ideals they cheered dutifully under the bus in a spiteful tantrum? Turned out the ideals weren't important to them after all.

Oh, yeah, we want more of those kind of young people, and the kind of demagoguery they're drawn to. Unfortunately, they're the most easily energized and tricked young people. Just give them a noisy, defiant crowd of other young people and they will come.

[betsuni]

53. Yes, supporters of populists are pessimistic about the economy, their opportunities for the future,

the government. LW or RW. "Progressive ideals" not important, it was about identity based on imaginary ideological/moral differences. Easy to manipulate, dangerous.

[NurseJackie]

59. Perfect summary and analysis. Thank you.

[Grins]

49. It absolutely is - for both parties.

I saw a pic a while back with the leadership of the House and the Senate. My first thought - Christ it looks like the old Soviet Politboro!

We have too many political leaders who are too distant in their thinking from the people they represent. Ron Brownstein got into this two years ago: a House, a Senate, a Supreme Court, headed by people too far removed from the lives of the majority of Americans, not representing their values and aspirations.

And here we are today: the majority of a nation’s citizens can’t get its candidates elected or its preferred policies passed even though their candidates won the popular vote. So the government’s legitimacy is compromised, pressure begins to build, we get deeper into minority rule until it all explodes.

And that ain't good. Gonna' be a bumpy ride.

[ripcord]

54. Does anyone think a member of the Squad could effecively replace Speaker Pelosi? nt

[NurseJackie]

58. No.

[betsuni]

62. Like, totally, literally no way.

[Cha]

73. No.. Experience and Qualifiations

count exponentially more than a number of how old you are.

[maxsolomon]

75. Jayapal might, and may still.

She's not in the Squad though.

[Autumn]

81. Yes I do and one eventualy will. eom

[progressoid]

90. Sure.

[Mr.Bill]

57. At least the older Democrats

like Biden and Pelosi are governing like they care about what this country will be like long after they are gone, unlike some of the older republicans.

[Meowmee]

61. Another ageist post

Lately I am seeing a lot links posted that appear to be ageist and holocaust denial/revisionist promoting posts. Why aren’t the moderators doing their job here?

[TexasTowelie]

65. Decisions of that nature are usually left to juries.

The forum hosts only lock threads which violate the statement of purpose for that forum. Even then, the post remains visible to all members.

In order to completely hide a post, there is an option to alert a post for bigotry/insensitivity and the decisions made by the juries can be appealed to the administrators (EarlG).

[Meowmee]

94. Yes I am aware of that

Yet anti semitic / holocaust revision and ageist posts should not be allowed. Responsible moderation would remove them without any jury. I find it very disturbing especially considering the current climate. This is supposed to be a dem site which is against this sort of harmful disinformation and divisionism.

[robbob]

135. Ageist I can see...

But holocaust denyers on DU??? Kind of shocked. Do you have a link?

[Meowmee]

136. I will try to find it

[robbob]

137. Thanks for trying,

but I wouldn’t spend to much time, because for all the problems and differences of opinion here on DU I can’t really imagine a thread like that being allowed to remain up for very long. Might have even been a troll posting…

[Bucky]

66. In 1981, the average Representative was 49 and the average Senator was 53.

Today it's 63 and 65, respectively.

This obviously creates generational biases.

Unfortunately, when you look at the behavior of the youngest Representative...

[JohnSJ]

71. Yes, to you last sentence. There is something to be said for experience

[Bucky]

87. There's also something to be said for rotation in office

There's also something to be said for getting fresh blood in congress. There's also something to be said for having more young Representatives for the people.

I don't dismiss experience. But a calcified Congress locked in place by a seniority system constantly engineering their own re-election through gerrymandering and lobbying donations and anonymous super-pacs is leaving us with an old Congress full of Representatives who are more brand names--propped up by professional staffers who mix with, aspire to be, and work mostly for the elites is keeping the system corrupt and unpopular.

And this results in an anti-responsibility prone Republican party winning a disproportional number of elections. The framers of the Constitution spoke highly in favor of the need for rotation office, although they did not build it into their system. Nothing proves their point stronger than the corruption and legalized bribery that goes on with this Congress full of 95% re-elected cronies

To be absolutely clear, I don't say aging is the cause of this problem. But it is a clear symptom of that calcification of power in Washington.

[ancianita]

111. Know what fresh blood does? Jack shit.Just ideas. No agency. Term limits is better called ELECTIONS.

You know how long it take a freshman congress person to learn their job? Almost an entire term, during which their gravy train of donors are more than willing to "help" them write legislation or block other legislation when not serving their interests. Human voters would suffer such corporate lobbying, as they now are through statehouses.

You'll also have to tell those who know congressional history about how rotation weakens congressional committees' work. Congressional committees are the standing institutional memory of Congress.

Meanwhile lobbyists across 50 states are already rewriting laws per their corporate owner donors because corruption starts instantly that way, and newbs there don't know any better than to let them.

As I said, term limits already exist. They're called ELECTIONS.

[Bucky]

116. I know it's fun pretending that gerrymandering isn't locking down Congress

You'd get better elections with term limits.

And it really doesn't take a freshman two whole years learn how to do their job. Picasso Cortez walked in doing her job great from day one. Cause she did her homework.

And the main reason it takes freshman longer to become effective on their jobs it's because of the bloated seniority system engendered by the rigged districts with 95% reelection rates.

I mean, you're basically making the arguments that everything is honky Dory the Congress right now. But in the real world we have a Congress that doesn't represent the country, that's beholden to special interests, that's under constant bribery from the lobbyist system, and that is fundamentally not doing its job.

I'm talking about the reality of what Congress is not getting done, and you're giving back the text from high school civics books.

[ancianita]

117. You show that you've no idea how many gerrymandering legislatures have lost in court.

Remember this?

-Albama congressional
-North Carolina congressional and state legislature
-Ohio state legislature
-Ohio congressional
-Oregon congressional

And we are not done yet.

Marc E. Elias @marceelias 1h
I am tired, but not tired of winning!
Goodnight.

I have noting but pity for your overall denial of the worth of long term Democrats. None of this is in high school civics books, which aren't used in schools anymore, anyway.

[Cha]

74. We're on the EDGE of FASCISM &

this is What Concerns you?!

Good God.. I Thank our Lucky Stars every GD Day we have Joe Biden as our POTUS and NOT TFFCG as our LEADER!!

I don't give one SHIT how OLD he is!

[NurseJackie]

101. It's a very superficial and shallow thing to be concerned about. The BEST politicians...

It's a very superficial and shallow thing to be concerned about. The BEST politicians are the ones who are EXPERIENCED. They know and understand how the system works. They actually READ the bills so that they know and understand what it is they're actually voting for (or against). They are LOYAL to the party. They have the temperament and demeanor to appreciate what it means to build coalitions. They know the value of give and take. They realize that nobody gets everything they want. They accept that most times you must give a little in order to get a little. They become adept at the art of compromise and finding common ground with their adversaries. They don't shit on the party or our party's leadership. They don't accuse Democrats of being "ideologically bankrupt" and they don't publicly proclaim that Democrats are "feeble". They understand the dangers in saying (in public and out loud) that Democrats are "corrupt" and that the party is an "absolute failure". Responsible politicians are wise enough to avoid holding grudges and seeking "payback" by making false accusations that "there's no difference between the two parties". The best politicians are the ones who hold the Democratic party up as always being BETTER than the Republicans rather than accusing Democrats of being "do-nothings". A lot of these positive traits can only be developed with age and wisdom. With age, one learns wisdom and respect for the process. With age, most responsible politicians understand that not all disagreements need to be aired-out on Twitter... when an email, phone-call, or private letter would work just fine.

[PatSeg]

125. Well said

Yes, it IS superficial and shallow and it feeds into the right-wing narrative that our President is too old and feeble to do the job. Sadly, some people do reach a point where they can no longer do their job effectively, while others are sharp and productive until the day they die. What we've seen the past year with this administration is the value of experience, something so often overlooked in our society.

[ancianita]

112. AMEN, SISTA.

[Autumn]

80. Lujan is 49 so that's not too old. But yeah I 100% agree. We also need a mandatory retirement age

for Senators and Reps.

[George II]

95. Some of our chronologically older Representatives or Senators can run....

....intellectual, strategical, and tactical rings around some of our younger Representatives or Senators.

Age has nothing to do with a person's ability to govern effectively.

[Jilly_in_VA]

99. And then there's Grassley....

[PufPuf23]

100. Brave post. I agree with you.

No reason to go into detail. I am old myself is a large part of the reason why this is my position.

[Emile]

102. That's why we have elections. Not happy, vote

them out. Barking at the wind will not accomplish anything.

[Jilly_in_VA]

103. I haven't missed ONE

since I was old enough to vote in 1964. Not even a local one. You?

[Emile]

104. Never have yet! I always vote in the primaries too, that's

where you vote to change candidates and kick the OLD ones out.

[Jilly_in_VA]

106. Preaching to the choir, then. n/t

[Emile]

107. Good, we're on the same page.

[treestar]

105. They were elected

So the voters as a group don't agree.

[Jilly_in_VA]

108. What percentage of the voters

voted SOME of these folks in? That's part of the question.

And I'm not even questioning the astuteness of some of these folks. Leahy is sharp. Grassley isn't. And I think Feinstein is way past her best and needs to retire. Furthermore, some of the younger a-wholes, like Cawthorn, have no business being there, but AOC can run rings around him in the brainpower department, so there's that.

[treestar]

120. You have to vote. People who don't vote give up having any say.

The people who vote get to decide. The people who vote like old people. They like their reps and Senators even if those of us from the other 49 states don't. They re-elect them into their dotage. Feinstein won her last election. They love her in California. I may think she is too old, but I don't get a say.

[TheFarseer]

109. To me it's less age

and more that they've been in politics too long, listening to the same consultants and the same conventional wisdom for too long. They just "know" things that aren't always true like, "Medicare negotiating prescription drug prices is too liberal for most voters." and "We have to spend more money on defense than the next 10 countries combined or else we'll look weak to voters."

[ancianita]

110. So why not give us a list of who they are, along with a list of their equally competent replacements

Okay? Take your time. I'll happily wait.

Otherwise, you're not helping in any way by showing off your flair for the obvious, which is ageism.

[onenote]

114. Based on one of your posts, you're almost 80

Should there also be a limit on the age at which one can vote?

[Jilly_in_VA]

126. Of course not.

False equivalence, and don't be stupid. I'm also not running for anything.

[onenote]

127. You're someone helping to decide who is the right person to hold office.

And you seem concerned that certain officeholders lose their mental sharpness as they age and thus should be timed out from holding office. So it seemed like a fair question.

But, of course, I don't believe that anyone should be deprived of the right to vote based on their mental acuity, whether age related or otherwise.

So, I'll ask a different question: since you support term limits, would you also support a rule that barred anyone over a certain age running for public office (even if they had never served or hadn't served the maximum number of terms you think is appropriate)?

[Jilly_in_VA]

131. First of all

I published the article as a point of debate, and you're making it PERSONAL. That's nasty and undemocratic (big D as well as small d).

I don't support an age rule. What I want is a rule that require anyone seeking public office at any level to pass a civics test which demonstrates that they have a basic knowledge of how government works. I would prefer that test to be the citizenship test that immigrants have to take, but you can't have everything, I suppose. There are plenty of Americans of all ages who can't even pass a basic civics test, FFS. And Khizr Khan knows more about the government than any of them. I would also like a rule that requires anyone seeking public office to have to pass a mental fitness test. That would certainly avoid the travesty of such as the Slobfather.

[Sympthsical]

115. This article was like pissing on bingo

Some things are intended for other rooms.

[11 Bravo]

118. I'm 71 and am morally certain that I possess more mental acuity than ...

Ron Johnson, Tommy Tuberville ... and don't even get me started on the multitude of GOP mental midgets that infest the House of Representatives.
But having said that, I realize that I'm not as sharp as I once was, and would hesitate to consider myself an optimal candidate to represent either my state or my congressional district.

At some point "ageism" simply becomes an acknowledgment of reality.

[onenote]

128. But you wouldn't support a limit on someone's right to vote

based on their age or mental acuity, right?

Term limits would result in the arbitrary denial of the right to choose a candidate because of their age, whether or not they have some unspecified "mental acuity" level.

[11 Bravo]

130. As to your question, absolutely not.

In no way would I support term limits based on a candidate's age.

I would simply take their age and apparent level of cognition into account prior to casting my vote.

[onenote]

132. Exactly my feelings as well.

And unlike some, I don't support the idea of requiring candidates to pass some sort of mental fitness test (who would formulate, who would judge, how often would it be given?)

[11 Bravo]

134. We're on the same page.

There is no one i would trust to make that determination.
Hell, every day you can watch some dickhead on FOX who watched four years of covfefe and other assorted idiocy without speaking up, now questioning President Biden's mental capacity. Can you imagine if they had the hammer?

[Midwestern Democrat]

119. For me, a major eye opener is comparing the DOBs of our House Leadership of the 1990s to today:

Democratic House Leadership - 1995:

Dick Gephardt, Minority Leader 01/31/1941
David Bonior, Minority Whip 06/06/1945

Democratic House Leadership - 2022:

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker 03/26/1940
Steny Hoyer, Majority Leader 06/14/1939
James Clyburn, Majority Whip 07/21/1940

Our House leaders from almost 30 years ago were born AFTER our House leaders RIGHT NOW. Frankly, I don't know why the hell the younger Democrats have allowed this situation to go on - the heir apparent to Pelosi should have been in the House leadership LONG before now. The current situation is not normal - look at the ages the past 10 Democratic Whips were when they ascended to that position: Nancy Pelosi (61); David Bonior (45); William Gray (47); Tony Coelho (44); Tom Foley (51); John Brademas (49); John McFall (54); Tip O'Neill (58); Hale Boggs (47); Carl Albert (46).

[Celerity]

142. Excellent reply.

[lees1975]

121. So, you're willing to promote age discrimination?

How does that fit with being Democratic?

[The Grand Illuminist]

124. You are definitely not alone.

There are pro constitution convention democrats who want to change the minimum age of office to 18 or 21 because if they are old enough to vote, they are old enough to run for office.

[nolabear]

133. Okay. What's the age limit? I want to know what people favor.

Sixty? Sixty-five? I know a hell of a lot of people who hit a great stride at 65. Seventy? Some people at seventy are far more healthy and capable than others at sixty-five.

Arbitrary number? What is it?

[kentuck]

138. Father and Son

[betsuni]

139. The problem: too many damn Republicans who don't want to help run the country,

want to destroy it. Too many damn Americans who don't care about voting because they think both sides are the same and their vote doesn't count despite decades of elections won by tiny margins.

Lujan, Bernie Sanders had heart attacks. Not like legislators are athletes or ballet dancers. Also, it's the 21st century.

[DFW]

140. Some people need to watch "Wild in the Streets" from 1968

The last line is spoken by a bullied (by the 29 year old president, btw) kid: "we're going to put everybody over ten out of business."

In my work, I've known guys in their forties burn out and die because their systems couldn't handle it. As for me, I turn 70 next month, and I still keep my "different-country-every-day" routine, though I don't know how much longer. Maybe a year, maybe ten. I know Steve Breyer retired for strategic reasons, but if one considers the three substantially younger clowns put on the SCOTUS by Trump, who's the real jurist, Breyer, or the Trump Three? Age is a factor, but not THE factor. Who should primary Joe Biden? Nina Turner?

[JI7]

141. There are some younger ones like Sinema who have a lot of power right now