Yes wanting Biden to step aside in 2024 because of his age is ageism.

[DestinyIsles]

I see articles and maundering reporters using a small sample of Democratic voters to say Biden shouldn't run again because of his age. Yes, if only Biden can change magically change his age, which he can't. Also, if you replace age with race, "If only he wasn't black, I would be excited for his running for President again" this sounds racist. If you flip it over with the word age, its ageism.

Plus, if President Biden wasn't in great shape or his health were declining, someone from his staff would have leaked to the press. That hasn't happened which means President Biden is in good health to run again.

[NowISeetheLight]

50. Hypocrisy...

Well it is part of the official RepubQcan party platform.

[kentuck]

2. Yes, it is.

Much like it would have been if Supreme Court Justice Ruth Ginsburg had been asked to step down because of her health and age conditions.

[newdayneeded]

29. Hmmm....

Would have worked out way better for us though, you agree?

[W_HAMILTON]

38. I disagree.

I think people claiming to be on the left simply supporting and voting for the 2016 candidate running on "the most progressive platform" in Democratic Party history would have worked out way better for us.

[treestar]

67. main difference there is she was there for life

having to be elected and re-elected and then there is a term limit. So we know there's an end to his term no matter how old he lives to be. But a supreme court justice is appointed by the president, so which party they are from matters most.

[tritsofme]

86. She absolutely should have retired before 2015.

[dsc]

94. Note you said health and age

not just age. I think it is perfectly reasonable to take age into consideration as one factor but not to say Biden needs to go soley due to age.

[jimfields33]

3. Senator Feinstein should have had same courtesy

Yes she did decide not to run but not before articles and announcements to run for her seat were made.

[jimfields33]

7. A lot of room? A little more would have been nice.

[quaint]

13. True, this.

[treestar]

68. she can be replaced by election in a known year

SCOTUS justices are there for life. If CA voters think she is too old, they don't have to vote for her. But you can't do anything about an aging Justice. Maybe try to convince them. RBG thought she'd outlast Trump. She missed by just a hair.

[genxlib]

4. Well

Now that you have settled that, we can all go back to pretending that each of us aren't personally ageing either.

I plan to live forever while only getting smarter and sharper. Why shouldn't we expect him to.

The difference between racism and ageism is that we all face ageing. We see it in ourselves and we see it in our loved ones.

Time is undefeated. It gets us all eventually.

For the vast majority of jobs, there is no reason to anticipate the future effects of ageing. This is different because we are projecting out for six years from now. There are no certainties for any age candidate but the odds change drastically when projecting into that age range.

Besides, it doesn't matter what you or I think. It matters what the average voter thinks. We can win without a good chunk of normal everyday Americans joining the diehards here.

Let me ask a hypothetical question...if he were to lose, would you support him running again in '28 or '32 or '36. If you said yes, you are not being honest with yourself. If you said no, then you are also drawing lines and just choosing a different place to draw them.

The discussions aren't unreasonable. Certainly not anymore unreasonable than pretending that it doesn't matter.

[BlackSkimmer]

9. Good post. nt

[Walleye]

12. The Democratic Party is not dumb enough to re-nominate somebody who lost. That's for the GOP

[DestinyIsles]

15. Yes if they are in poor health they shouldn't run again

Even if they were younger and in poor health they shouldn’t run again. In Senator Feinstein case her staff leaked to the press that she was in poor health and multiple candidates running for her seat before she announced she wasn’t running again was a sign. So far that hasn’t happened with Biden.

[obnoxiousdrunk]

23. +1. n/t

[Martin Eden]

91. I agree

No human being, including Joe Biden, is impervious to the eventual debilitating effects of age -- both physical and mental.

And no one can predict exactly when a sharp decline will occur, but it seems pretty obvious the risks increase after 70, 80, 90...

How old is too old to for the most consequential elected office on the planet -- 90, 100, 110?

Is drawing the line ANYWHERE a form of unreasonable prejudice?

These are valid questions aside from any specific person or the political considerations of the moment.

Having said all that, I will support the Democratic candidate who I think has the best chance to win the 2024 general election for president.

If that's Joe Biden, so be it. Keeping Trump or DeSantis or whover the R's nominate out if the White House overrides all other considerations.

[Mosby]

5. Are mandatory retirement laws ageist?

[MayReasonRule]

8. Yes, yes they are.

[BlackSkimmer]

11. So it's ageist to draw a line at what point people can fly commercial aircraft?

It's ageist to require the elderly to take driving tests more often? Is it ageist to have a law allowing older folks to drive trains? Taxis? Buses? Helicopters? School buses?

Curious.

[Ocelot II]

20. That line wrt airline pilots has been moved.

The mandatory retirement age of 60 for commercial pilots was changed to 65 not too long ago as people are staying healthier longer. The requirement exists at all because there are statistics indicating how certain health problems affecting the safety of flight are more common after age 65, and all pilots are required to get regular physicals. "Ageism" is an unjustifiable prejudice, but there's evidence supporting some limitations for pilots. However, the health issues that would be a problem for someone flying an airplane don't apply as well to someone with a desk job, even a high-stress desk job.

[BlackSkimmer]

25. But how about the average "little old lady in tennis shoes" lol? Of which I am one.

My mother was quite frightening out on the road at 90. She could barely see over the steering wheel.

I took over driving for her without making a big deal of it.

[Ocelot II]

27. My dad voluntarily stopped driving when he was 90

after a couple of fender-benders. His vision and reaction time had deteriorated and he knew it. I'm glad I didn't have to take the keys away from him myself.

[BlackSkimmer]

36. Yes, I could never have done that to either of them.

I learned to listen as mom told me her plans for the next week or so, and then I just turned up at her on house on each day to play chauffeur. I usually had an excuse like let's go to lunch or dinner after, etc.

No doubt she understood, but it was never mentioned.

Good on your dad. It's really so sad to watch people's skills and abilities diminish.

[MayReasonRule]

97. Damn Skippy!!!

[MayReasonRule]

21. Abilities ought to inform possibilities... Otherwise, equitable treatment ceases to exist.

Capabilities vary according to each individual.

While broad statements regarding various elements of our society are often employed, without accurately assessments of skill levels, equitiable opportunities cease to exist.

May reason rule.

[MayReasonRule]

43. Increased Assessments for Age Corollary Defects

...is a quite prudent and reasoned methodology to employ.

[treestar]

69. what's the maximum age?

what about people who are still OK at that age?

It depends on the person.

[Celerity]

16. Not true. Examples: 75, 80, 85, 90+ year olds shouldn't fly jumbo jets or work as beat cops.

That is NOT ageism to block those from occurring.

[MayReasonRule]

18. Abilities define possibilities.. It is wrong to deny capable individuals equitable opportuties.

No matter the age.

[Kaleva]

26. Do you have any issues with testing then?

To see if the older people still retain the skills necessary? Like having mandatory driving tests and exams for those past a certain age?

[MayReasonRule]

46. I wholeheartedly agree.

[Kaleva]

48. It wouldn't bother me

[MayReasonRule]

57. Whomever will Win!! An Absolute Win is Essential for the Continuation of our Democracy...

The GOP is full-on Machiavelli presented as a theocratic-fascist-oligarchy.

I'm totally okay with our candidate not being Biden. As long as our candidate undoubtedly coalesces our numerous constituencies, I'm in favor of that candidate.

I'm not okay with age being the sole predicating factor.

Competence is key, for me, for our party, and for our nation.

Here's to a fabulous win for our party, our populace, and the better of mankind writ large!!

...and I always keep in mind ...

Ya' better try to have fun, no matter what you do...!!

Laissez bon temps rouler!!

Don't ever let 'em keep us down!!

[Lancero]

65. So, what issues would you have with the same standards being applied equally? Across all ages?

Take a look at any crash statistics, you'll see that it's not the 75+'s that are leading the charge.

https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/overview/age-of-driver/

The biggest outlier seems to be... Oh. 25-24 year olds, at 22.3%. And they make up 16.9% of the driver base. Comparatively, 75+ drivers make up 8.9% of the driver base, while accounting for 8.2% of crashes.

If you want to argue in favor of age based restrictions on driving for safety reasons, then you're focusing on the wrong end of the age spectrum.

[Kaleva]

75. I just suggested testing

It's a scientific fact that cognitive skills and reflexes decline for most people when they get older.

If they can pass the same test they took when they were 16, then there is no problem

[Lancero]

82. And it's also a scientific fact that cognitive skills aren't fully formed at younger ages.

So if you're wanting to push a age restriction on driving for safety concerns, well... Look at the above statistics.

If safety is really your goal, you'd be pushing to increase the minimum age to be able to drive.

[Kaleva]

85. Where did I say that there should be an age limit on driving?

I'm talking about testing.. As long as the elderly can pass the test,
written and practical, there is no age limit. It would just depend on their skills .

Are you arguing that someone who can't pass the test should still be allowed to keep their license?

[Lancero]

92. You're arguing that it should only apply to them. I'm wondering why you don't...

Support the same standards being applied to all age groups.

So, correction. You're not in favor of banning them from driving, you're in favor in applying additional requirements upon them to drive for no other reason than their age.

Either way, you're being ageist - and thus bigoted - af.

[Kaleva]

93. Because it's a scientific fact that skills can deteriorate in old age.

"While we can't see it happening, the brain also undergoes physical changes as we age. This includes:

loss of volume in the areas responsible for memory and planning
reduced connectivity between brain cells
decreased blood flow in the brain
increase in inflammation
These changes can cause a slight decrease"

https://neurotrack.com/resources/normal-aging-vs-cognitive-decline

[Lancero]

105. I'll refer you, again, the the above statistics I posted. What age groups are...

Responsible for a oversized portion of vehicles accidents?

Bonus question, what percentage of accidents are caused by elderly drivers, and is that total percentage higher or lower than how much of the driverbase they make up?

So, I'll say again, if your primary goal here really is safety (And not being driven in any way, shape, or form, by ageism) then you'd be in favor of your increased 'standards' being applied to every driver no matter their age group.

[Kaleva]

106. Do you agree that cognitive skills can decline due to age?

If you have links to reputable sources that argue that they don't, I'd be happy to read them

[Polybius]

41. No 100 year old on the planet can can do certain requirements

I'd like to race the fastest 100 year old, just to see if I stand a chance.

[treestar]

73. But the presidency is not like either or those

and those younger people who fly or are beat cops might make lousy presidents.

It is too individual-dependent.

[Kaleva]

24. Sending 60 y/O's into combat isn't a good thing

Pro sports doesn't have a mandatory retirement age but the nature of the games forces retirement on the players

[BlackSkimmer]

33. I'm hoping most 60 year olds would be like, "oh hell no" when asked to serve lol.

Im not talking about defending your own home here or your own country (Ukraine).

[Kaleva]

45. I'd have to fight to the death as I can't run away

I can hobble fast but that's about it.

[quaint]

17. Everyone ages differently.

Arbitrary retirement age is ageist in my opinion.
I know a 90+ y.o. I'd trust with my life, unlike a 57-year-old
neighbor whose kids are trying to stop her from driving.

[MayReasonRule]

19. Hear, hear!!!!!

[BlackSkimmer]

34. Yes, but there are so many studies done on this.

The data doesn't lie. People over 80 are more likely to have a traffic accident, as are (according to the insurance tables) males under 25.

There will always be exceptions to the rule. Obviously, the insurance companies are trying to save money, but safety is the number one consideration here.

[quaint]

37. You are correct, of course. I used a poor example.

Physical aging should be used, but as appropriate to the position. I think cognitive level is most important and we shouldn't lose experience, and perhaps wisdom, just based on age. As an active septuagenarian, I admit bias.

[genxlib]

44. In this case, an arbitrary retirement age isn't the issue

People questioning whether Biden is the best choice for this reason aren't suggesting there be a law that someone of his age can't run.

The question is whether it is prudent.

In my mind, it isn't even directly an issue for me because I trust a Democratic administration to handle that appropriately and a VP that can step in.

The question of whether it is prudent in my mind is how it will be accepted by the voters and whether they are willing to accept those potential declines.

Put another way, I will vote for him if he is the nominee. But will enough regular voters.

[treestar]

71. exactly

It depends on Joe and Joe alone. How will he be in 2 years is all we need to know. Not somebody or other's dad who faded earlier or even themselves thinking I'm 80 and I couldn't do the job. We or Dad could never do that job, not at 40 or 50 or 80. It's if Joe can.

[Walleye]

14. We've got to trust Joe, he's done very well for us so far and has very good judgment

[peggysue2]

76. Absolutely!

Look at the accomplishments President Biden has had after 2 years in office, laws passed with a razor-thin majority and actually receiving bipartisan support (something a lot of people laughed at before the successes).

Look at the marathon trip to Europe President Biden completed recently with a schedule that could have easily brought a man half his age to his knees.

Look at the unity of our allies, an alliance that President Biden has helped repair leading to the full-throated support of Ukraine and her defense of democracy.

Recall the the State of the Union address that demonstrated mental clarity, grace and incredible nimbleness that had Republicans cheering for seniors and their so-called entitlements.

The speech was a triumph.So much so that MTG looked and sounded like the howling monkey she is. LOL!

The list goes on and on. Biden has been adept at the job because he knows what he's doing, has had years of experience and political savvy to draw on.

As long as Joe Biden's health and mental acuity remain strong he will be the favorite in 2024. He will have the advantage of incumbency, something Trump squandered along with everything else.

Republicans are doubling down on their worst instincts. Biden is getting lined up to kick their fascist asses.

They know it and so does the President.

Don't fall for the ageist bait.

[LakeArenal]

22. I think not running Biden falls into GOP hands.

I see Fux headlines:

Even Dems agree Biden has diminished facilities.

Biden had dementia the whole time.


Democrats scramble to replace dementia Biden.

Biden throws Democrats into disarray.

Libs cry when weak prez replaced.


This after one of the most effective administrations in history.

[Ocelot II]

28. Bingo.

[BlackSkimmer]

35. I don't know if his faculties are diminished or not.

I voted for him, and I'd vote for Hillary.

But I'd be glad to see a younger candidate...younger meaning 60s lol.

[iemanja]

60. If he doesn't run, the headlines don't matter

[LakeArenal]

61. What? Those headlines would steal the show from any candidate that would run.

I don’t think any qualified Democrat will accept a draft so the points are moot because Joe will run. He will win and then we can talk Harris or not in 2028.

[iemanja]

62. The point may be moot

but so is your claim about headlines. They would be about Biden, not the hypothetical other candidate.

[LakeArenal]

63. That's what I am saying. Not running Biden will steal the show from any candidate.

Along with libs cry…..

[iemanja]

66. I disagree

[Johnny2X2X]

30. There is no one more capable than Biden right now

He's at the perfect age IMO. His experience and wisdom are absolutely what is needed to do the job better than anyone else can. The results of the last 26 months are simply jaw dropping, there's no way to argue with them. And only Biden could have produced them.

[crickets]

55. 👆👆

[Torchlight]

31. If the day comes they can ever point to a particular

and negative consequence by the administration specifically caused due to his age, they may have something. But, as that day not arrived, it's just sour grapes being thrown at the walls in the hope something sticks.

I kinda see it as inevitable, tantrums for the sake of tantrums from people who go out of their way to misunderstand the most benign phrase as an excuse to throw tantrums. Their reductions to the absurd are just idiotic pretenses of common sense.

I'm beginning to wonder if people actually believe part of a President's obligations is running a 440 or a triathlon. Lots of movies out there to stir the imaginations I guess.

I s'pose if I did place an age limit on the office, it would be the same age limit I place on taking evening college courses: that is, I really have no idea what that age would be.

[progressoid]

32. Joe Biden, "I think it's a legitimate thing to be concerned about anyone's age, including mine."

from an MSNBC interview.

[LakeArenal]

52. "Concerned" for....and replaced for..... are two different things.

Replaced for being old is ageism.

[iemanja]

102. Name one person here who has said Biden should be "replaced."

That's a straw horse. Some say age is a legitimate concern, while others are pretending the electorate won't even think about it.
People here are responding to the OP's bogus claim that concerns over the advanced age of the president is the same as racism.

[Fiendish Thingy]

39. Right or wrong, age will be a part of each voter's decision making process

Biden has acknowledged and accepted that.

Trying to shame others with “ageism” labels won’t change the facts.

At this point, I think sexism will be as big a factor as ageism in the 2024 race, because the GOP and it’s dark money PACs will hammer the idea that if Biden is re-elected, the statistical odds of Harris becoming president before 2028 are extremely high. If they can’t effectively damage Biden with attacks on age and mental competency (especially difficult if Trump is the nominee), they will focus on Harris.

I guarantee it.

And if Trump is the nominee, I guarantee he will pick a much younger, probably female, running mate.

[Polybius]

40. While I understand that point, suppose he was older?

If he was 90 would it be ageism?

[newdayneeded]

47. I guess not,

I learned up thread that 90 y/o's should be allowed to fly commercial jets.

[treestar]

74. if he was still in good shape, maybe?

that would be rare, but could happen.

Probably it would not be in question though. We found a 78 year old who could beat TFG. Others younger might not have.

Had Hillary won, we wouldn't have this issue. If TFG would go away, we might not. It just happened this way.

[iemanja]

81. They did make it an issue about Hillary

even as she ran against an older candidate in the primary. People talked about it all the time. She was too old, but older men are not.

[ismnotwasm]

42. Well sure it is.

Biden has shocked me at just how good he is at being president, how well he handles the press, how aware he is about issues, big and small.

He is slowly gathering the youth vote. He has decades of experience and connections. He clearly understands historical context.

And age aside I believe he is a president for the history books, and he is the president we need to guide this nation over the next few years.

To be clear, I was NOT an enthusiastic Biden supporter. He has exceeded all my expectations. I had no idea he’d be this good.

[Sky Jewels]

49. I don't understand why so many people are so desperate to pretend that

age has no effect on people's ability to function at high-pressure, high-level, demanding jobs. For example, we're all supposed to pretend that 89-year-old Diane Feinstein is as mentally sharp as she was 40 years ago, otherwise we're "ageist" meanies who hate Democrats.

Give me a break.

[ismnotwasm]

53. It's more about capability as well as capacity

Biden seems to be doing just fine. Assuming impairment because of age is ageism, not expecting age-related changes. They come to everyone who ages

[iemanja]

58. It's illogical

Moreover, they can try to police thought all they want. It won't affect voters who will consider age as a factor.

[Samrob]

51. Ok, I am going to say this and hope it isn't taken the wrong way. I voted early for Biden Harris.

I will vote for them again if that is our Dem ticket. My loyalty pledge is I will vote for the Dem ticket unless MTG is on it.

But here goes what I want to say about Biden and ageism. I am 81. I feel like I could run for President. I believe Biden does extremely well for a person who had a stuttering problem and is now in his late 70s. He looks fit to me. And his small lapses and misstatements are mild compared to the bellowing orange man during his term in office and even now.

SO. I think the REAL issue not that Biden is too old run again. For many, he is too old to run again with Kamala as VP.

What bullshit! But it is a real sentiment expressed by, sadly, some of my friends who just do not want to see Harris as President.

Now imagine why the MAGAs talk about Biden's age all the time when Trump is almost as old.

I will happily vote again for the Biden Harris ticket but quite a few will not.

[Poiuyt]

54. Biden's problem isn't his age as much as his inability to control

the narrative about how effective he's been as a president. Unfortunately, most Democrats would rather someone else run next year, so Biden has got to improve his PR if he wants to be reelected.

As it is, I don't see Biden being president in 2025. It will either be another Democrat or a Republican. And lord help us if the election comes down to Biden vs DeSantis.

[iemanja]

56. Biden himself said it was a legitimate concern

Pretending an 86-year-old man isn't affected by age isn't logical. You can complain all you want, but voters will consider it as a factor.

[MayReasonRule]

59. Indeed, a factor, not though, necessarily, the over-riding factor. Health, Competence, Leadership.

That's what I want to see in our candidate.

All the factors must be considered.

This is not a battle to be lost.

[treestar]

70. no but it depends

there are people having strokes in their 50s and others still running around in their early 90s. There is no hard line like there might be for minimum age issues.

It's just so variable. The retirement age was set to an age where people were likely to die. People worked up to the end. Now retirement has become a time to travel or do whatever you want with your remaining years - there is thought to be a time period left to do that in. It does not have to do with disability.

[iemanja]

79. and?

Are you suggesting voters aren't going to weigh it as a factor? Who are you trying to convince? I'm not the kind of person you need to worry about. I'll vote Democratic regardless, as will everyone on this board. That's why the OP's thought police efforts are meaningless.

[betsuni]

88. "thought police efforts"

[treestar]

89. make an effort to convince

anyone among the voters - pay attention to policies, there's a vice president, and vote on more than just age? Maybe I'm preparing for that? If TFG runs, they have nothing anyway. If someone younger runs, sure, they are going to say vote for me because I'm not 82. Nikki Haley already started it.

But we want to fight that, not sit around agreeing. 82 year old Biden is better than 50 something Repub candidate, whoever that may be.

[iemanja]

95. I'm not a Republican

Nor do I meet Republicans, let alone convince them of anything. I don't want to see a Republican victory, which is why I am concerned about Biden's age, among other things. I know that makes me unwelcome on this board, but my concerns are real. You speak as though we have no choice who the nominee is. You may well be right, but that's us giving the GOP their election campaign.

[treestar]

108. No, the independent swing voters

Rs will try to get their vote with this, but a Republican is still a Republican who will do Republican things.

[iemanja]

110. If you imagine it's only an issue because Republicans bring it up

You are not facing reality. The fact people here are arguing about it shows that it's a concern among Democrats. The fact people here are so desperate to squash out dissent shows how concerned they are about it.


As for me, I won't be convincing anyone. That's not what GOTV is. I live in a heavily Democratic city, which is why I rarely run into a conservative. Voters will make up their own minds, and they will consider age. No amount of argument here will have even the slightest impact on that.

[Sympthsical]

64. Age is not just a number and not like race

Racial differences are mostly just melanin and surface physical attributes. Age is a complicated physiological process with measurable physical and cognitive effects that have been studied by science for decades.

The comparison of the two is just kind of weird and awful. They are not the same things. It's a cheap comparison meant as a bit of emotional blackmail. So pass on that one.

What people should say is that age is not necessarily determinative, and that would be a true statement. How people age is a complicated interplay between genetics, lifestyle, and Nature's dice rolls. However, as people age, those dice rolls become increasingly loaded. That is why people of a certain age are not allowed to fly a jumbo jet. Yes, one pilot may be fine, but another may not in a not yet perceptible way. What is the likelihood that physical or cognitive aging will affect performance? Those risks increase over time. We know this. We can measure it and build statistical models on it.

How much are you willing to bet your life on that dice roll because the refusal to admit to the effects of aging is a bit of self-pride gone wonky?

Because I'm not super excited at the prospect of making that dice roll.

When it comes to considering a much, much older person for very high pressure, very involved job, everyone's going to play insurance actuary. What is the likelihood problems will develop? What is the likelihood that person will die? Even if you say they're in 100% perfect health, shit happens once you're at that age. It can be anything, and it can come from a clear blue sky.

It's the most important job in the country. People are going to take these things into consideration. Calling them number racists isn't going to change that.

I get that people hate admitting they're aging, that it's a thing that happens. I'm in my early 40s and went back to college to shift careers. In my head, I'm still like 28 or something and being around people in their early 20s all day makes the self-perception worse. I kind of forget, "Oh right, I'm middle aged now." And if I get too big for my britches, my bed will remind me at around 5:30a when I wake and think I'm going to bound down the stairs. "Well that's a sensation in my back I've never felt before . . . how curious . . . must've slept wrong . . ."

Look, the chances of physical or cognitive decline in 80-somethings are quite a bit not nothing, and pretending such is denial. Are we science-based people or not?

If President Biden chooses to run, he'll be our nominee. That will be that. I will then vote for him. And it won't matter much what I think about anything.

But people who get mad about the commentary better buckle in. It's going to be two years of obvious comments and questions, because his age is unusual for such a demanding job, and people will have concerns about it that are based in their own experiences, observations, and also science and statistics. That's how it's going to go.

And a lot the anger will be less about being mad about the commentary about the President's age. It will be anger at commentary because they're older, too, and don't want to be realistic about it.

But that's ok. I'm old, too. Now, I'ma go crack the hell out of my back on the corner of a doorway for a bit. Because, you know, that bed . . .

[BlackSkimmer]

77. Damn good post.

So glad for folks like you here!

[Beautiful Disaster]

72. This thread is filled with a bunch of inconsistent nonsense.

If Biden's age is an actual issue - as in you can point to tangible examples where he's struggling to do his job, please present that information. But if you're saying he's too old just because you think he's too old for the job - well, yeah, that's agist.

Has Biden done anything over the last two years that makes you think he can't handle the job at his age?

If the answer is no - his age isn't all that relevant.

People keep mentioning Feinstein but that's a different situation entirely. Feinstein, according to many people, has shown extreme cognitive decline - to the point that her staff essentially did her work for her. That is completely different. I haven't heard, from even sources not sympathetic to Biden, that there is any indication he's incapable of handling his role as president. Any assumption that he is incapable of running in 2024, or serving a second term, solely because OF his age - and nothing more - is agist and should not be tolerated.

Unless someone pipes up with actual examples or stories to indicate the mental acuity isn't there now, I think we need to stop calling attention to it. It's not doing our side any favors and just plays into the hands of the GOP.

Either you think Joe is doing a great job or you don't. If you don't, and you think part of his shortcomings are due to his age, speak up and show examples. That's how it should be when dealing with the age of anyone.

[ProfessorGAC]

78. Excellent Post (nt)

[iemanja]

80. You know very well people can't do that without getting a hide.

Which is why you made the challenge.

The fact is you can try to stamp out dissenting thought as much as you want. Voters are going to consider his age, and Biden himself said that was legitimate. Age will absolutely be a factor among the electorate. Everyone on this board will vote Democratic regardless, so who are you trying to convince?

[Beautiful Disaster]

100. If everyone on this board is going to vote for Biden...

Then who are those harping about his age trying to convince? Hm?

[iemanja]

101. It's the OP who is "harping"

Some of us are telling him his claims are false. The claim that concerns about an 86 yr old president and racism are the same thing is absurd.

The point isn't that we won't vote for him. It's that no matter how much some of you pretend age isn't a factor, that's not how the electorate will see it. It will be a factor, no matter how much you work to stomp out dissent on this site. Why people spend so much energy trying to ensure that no one on this site dares to harbor an unapproved thought escapes me. It's an empty exercise.

[Beautiful Disaster]

107. The point is that your concern has no merit without examples.

Joe Biden seems as alert and energetic as any president recently. I mentioned in my post that even less favorable sources to Biden aren't out there really questioning his mental acuity. It doesn't happen and that's something you can't really hide. Reagan's mental decline was even reported by the press.

Biden is doing a better job, imo, than any of his predecessors probably all the way back to LBJ and for that, I don't think his age should be an issue. He's either doing a good job or he's not.

[iemanja]

109. Favorable sources aren't the problem

the electorate is. You keep ignoring that fact in favor of chastising DUers. It's completely irrelevant to the outcome of the general election.

[Beautiful Disaster]

112. I said unfavorable (less favorable).

But you do you. Have fun not giving examples. I'm out.

[iemanja]

113. You're playing games

and it's not cute. And you relentlessly avoid the point.

[Beautiful Disaster]

115. You seem to be playing a game with multiple replies to one message.

In all your rambling, you still haven't provided a coherent message - nor have you given any examples where Biden's age has proven an issue with his presidency. Everything you've provided is superficial and irrelevant and frankly, a waste of time.

bIDeN iS oLd is not an argument or message. It means nothing to me and doesn't get to the heart of the point in my original post (the one that started all this). If you don't think Biden is a good president because he's too old - pipe up with examples of WHY he isn't fit for the job. If you can't, and you want to hide behind some invisible rules, then we're done here. You're wasting my time and not worth another thought.

Cheers.

[iemanja]

116. While you ignore the points in both

1) You are making the challenge knowing full well if anyone answers they will have their post hidden. That is your game.
2) All your berating amounts to naught. It doesn't matter what I or other DUers think, since we will all vote for Biden regardless. It's the electorate that will consider Biden's age. You stand at the polling booths and demand they give you examples. See how well that works.

You've consistently refused to address both points, and you won't. Out.

[iemanja]

114. I already addressed that point.

https://democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=17695354

[iemanja]

111. Moreover

It's clear you too are concerned about Biden's age. If it weren't, you wouldn't be so determined to stomp out dissent.

[betsuni]

87. Thank you! There's no evidence. Just like Hillary Clinton's imaginary corruption, Biden's

imaginary "centrism," President Obama's imaginary "neoliberalism." BS.

[MayReasonRule]

98. That's right!!

Thank you for your voice of reason.

Delusion divides.
Reason restores.

May reason rule.

[Ocelot II]

99. Exactly.

[Celerity]

84. It's not us young folk, it's the Boomers & up, plus the older Gen Xers, who are driving the internal

'anti-Biden as nominee' sentiment.

Net support from my cohort (18-34yo, I am 26) for Biden being our 2024 nominee is 48 points HIGHER than the Boomer (and older Gen X) 50 to 64yo cohort's support.

Biden sees surge in Dem backing for 2024 run, with support highest among the young

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3876577-biden-sees-surge-in-dem-support-for-2024-run-with-support-highest-among-the-young-poll/

The number of Democratic voters who think President Biden should be the party’s nominee in 2024 is rising, according to a new Emerson College national survey released on Tuesday.

Seventy-one percent of Democratic voters said Biden should carry the party’s banner in the presidential election next year, up from 58 percent in last month’s Emerson College poll.

Support for Biden to run for a second term is highest among 18- to 34-year-old Democratic voters, with 85 percent of the group saying he should run again. Only 15 percent of 18 to 34-year-old Democratic voters said someone else should be the nominee, according to the survey.

Seventy-two percent of 35- to 49-year-old Democrats said Biden should be the nominee, while 28 percent said it should be someone else. Among 50- to 64-year-old Democratic voters, 61 percent said he should be the nominee, while 39 percent said it should be someone else. Sixty-seven percent of Democrats 65 years and older said he should be the nominee, and 33 percent said it should be someone else.

snip

Emerson is an A- rated poll



Here is the data

direct link

https://emersoncollegepolling.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/ECP_National_2.25.23..xlsx

Here are snapshots of the age cohort-related crosstabs

[treestar]

90. Wow, still a majority but

lesser as they get older.

Have to fight the people who think that because they are older and feel less able that it applies to everyone else equally. Also those whose parents are aging and think their parents' decline applies to everyone.

IMHO people who are very successful can function longer. The way they hang on and don't retire, Feinstein, RBG, Biden, many Senators in their 70s, leads me to believe it's an exciting and fascinating life. So they don't prefer retiring. The stimulation keeps their minds sharper.

[iemanja]

96. That may because as you age

You feel it's effects. I know I have, and I'm substantially younger than Biden.

[Autumn]

103. Not really. Stupid for sure but it's not ageism.

[Tribetime]

104. I just want us to have the best chance of winning

Which will include a lot of what independents believe