Trump's senior citizen senility signifies the need for a constitutional amendment to cap the age of the presidency

Cypress

Well-known member
The 25th Amendment, designed as a failsafe for presidential incapacity, has proven to be merely decorative. In theory, it outlines the transition of power should a president be unable to fulfill official duties, but in practice, partisanship has rendered it toothless. It was allegedly discussed during Ronald Reagan's second term as signs of his cognitive decline surfaced, but no action was taken; Reagan, then the oldest president, was diagnosed with Alzheimer's just five years post-presidency. After the January 6th insurrection, calls from Democrats for then-Vice President Mike Pence to invoke the 25th fell on deaf ears, underscoring the amendment's practical limitations in the thick drama of American politics.

According to the Pew Research Center, the public prefers presidents who aren't senior citizens. About half the nation believes the sweet spot for a president is their 50s, while another 24% give the nod to candidates navigating their 60s. The debate barely flickers between parties. A paltry 3% of U.S. adults advocate for command-in-chiefs cruising in their 70s or beyond, hinting that perhaps it's high time Congress entertained the thought of etching an age cap into the legislative books.


 
The 25th Amendment, designed as a failsafe for presidential incapacity, has proven to be merely decorative. In theory, it outlines the transition of power should a president be unable to fulfill official duties, but in practice, partisanship has rendered it toothless. It was allegedly discussed during Ronald Reagan's second term as signs of his cognitive decline surfaced, but no action was taken; Reagan, then the oldest president, was diagnosed with Alzheimer's just five years post-presidency. After the January 6th insurrection, calls from Democrats for then-Vice President Mike Pence to invoke the 25th fell on deaf ears, underscoring the amendment's practical limitations in the thick drama of American politics.

According to the Pew Research Center, the public prefers presidents who aren't senior citizens. About half the nation believes the sweet spot for a president is their 50s, while another 24% give the nod to candidates navigating their 60s. The debate barely flickers between parties. A paltry 3% of U.S. adults advocate for command-in-chiefs cruising in their 70s or beyond, hinting that perhaps it's high time Congress entertained the thought of etching an age cap into the legislative books.


Codified age discrimination isn't something that I'd ever back.
I'm not capable of being POTUS at this age.
Neither is Biden or Trump.

But Bernie Sanders certainly is.
So is Elizabeth Warren.

It's up to the electorate to decide,
and if a nation has a genuinely stupid electorate
[we'll find out about ours real soon],
it doesn't really deserve to prosper.
 
Codified age discrimination isn't something that I'd ever back.
I'm not capable of being POTUS at this age.
Neither is Biden or Trump.

But Bernie Sanders certainly is.
So is Elizabeth Warren.

It's up to the electorate to decide,
and if a nation has a genuinely stupid electorate
[we'll find out about ours real soon],
it doesn't really deserve to prosper.
We already discriminate against <18 year olds, theyre the ones that have to live the next ~60 years with the fallout from current policy. Why should we let the olds order for the table when they're about to leave the restaurant?
 
We already discriminate against <18 year olds, theyre the ones that have to live the next ~60 years with the fallout from current policy. Why should we let the olds order for the table when they're about to leave the restaurant?
Because we're the ones who've been paying for the food.
 
Codified age discrimination isn't something that I'd ever back.
I'm not capable of being POTUS at this age.
Neither is Biden or Trump.

But Bernie Sanders certainly is.
So is Elizabeth Warren.

It's up to the electorate to decide,
and if a nation has a genuinely stupid electorate
[we'll find out about ours real soon],
it doesn't really deserve to prosper.
AMEN!

To arbitrarily block someone from the presidency for age is not appreciably different from blocking someone for being the wrong color...or sex. A responsible electorate must decide that...and if the electorate is not responsible, then the Republic must pay the price. I personally consider several people in their 70's and 80's (and several younger than 35) that I think would be a better choice that at least one of the candidates now running.
 
Codified age discrimination isn't something that I'd ever back.
I'm not capable of being POTUS at this age.
Neither is Biden or Trump.

But Bernie Sanders certainly is.
So is Elizabeth Warren.

It's up to the electorate to decide,
and if a nation has a genuinely stupid electorate
[we'll find out about ours real soon],
it doesn't really deserve to prosper.
Age discrimination is already codified. One has to be 35 to run for president.
 
AMEN!

To arbitrarily block someone from the presidency for age is not appreciably different from blocking someone for being the wrong color...or sex. A responsible electorate must decide that...and if the electorate is not responsible, then the Republic must pay the price. I personally consider several people in their 70's and 80's (and several younger than 35) that I think would be a better choice that at least one of the candidates now running.

AMEN!

To arbitrarily block someone from the presidency for age is not appreciably different from blocking someone for being the wrong color...or sex. A responsible electorate must decide that...and if the electorate is not responsible, then the Republic must pay the price. I personally consider several people in their 70's and 80's (and several younger than 35) that I think would be a better choice that at least one of the candidates now running.
Alexander the Great was only 23, Joan of Arc was only 19, Jesus was only 30, so leadership can come from young adults. But I think some seasoning and life experience is warranted to lead a representative democracy like the USA
 
Alexander the Great was only 23, Joan of Arc was only 19, Jesus was only 30, so leadership can come from young adults. But I think some seasoning and life experience is warranted to lead a representative democracy like the USA
Yes...I agree.

But I still think that to arbitrarily block someone from the presidency for age is not appreciably different from blocking someone for being the wrong color...or sex. A responsible electorate must decide that...and if the electorate is not responsible, then the Republic must pay the price. I personally consider several people in their 70's and 80's (and several younger than 35) that I think would be a better choice that at least one of the candidates now running.
 
"What they accuse you of they are doing themselves, every time"
Tucker

Things that are true of them (Biden) they accuse Trump of.
 
Age is not the same for everyone. Plenty of old people are very sharp. When you have someone with emotional and mental problems like Trump competing well,it is the news and political parties not doing their jobs. The news slammed Biden for age and speaking mistakes, but they let Trump continue without pointing out his outrageous gaffes and lies. Trump makes the same kind of mistakes Biden got roasted for. He shows similar age related problems and has a family Alzheimer's history. He has covered up his physicals and when you hear him speak, you know why.
 
Age discrimination is already codified. One has to be 35 to run for president.
If you're told that you can't run for president because you're not 35 yet, you can still run for president.

If you're told that you can't run for president because you're 70, that's a bit different.

And frankly, I don't believe in term limits either.

If the electorate elects a demented president like Trump,
or even one that's merely spent like Biden,
the fault lies with the electorate,
not the candidate.
The Constitution could be at fault, I suppose, because the founders came up with our screwball federal system.

Also, the party could be at fault for choosing its nominee through a primary voting process,
one of America's seriously dumber ideas.

Sometimes I feel that I'm the only one on this forum willing to admit
that this republic is overrun with too many unbelievably stupid people.

We wouldn't have a MAGA movement
following a tea bagger movement
following a Contract on America movement
following a silent moral majority movement
if we weren't seriously fucked up with seriously stupid people.

Can I possibly be the only one to recognize it?
In a free democracy, you get the government you deserve,
and based on what we've given ourselves,
we are seriously fucked up and don't deserve much.

Right now, looking at the tools that our Constitution has given us,
I honestly doubt that America can even be repaired democratically.

I believe our only choice COULD BE a benign socialist dictatorship,
benign only after the conduct of a massive, Draconian purge of assholes,
to put things back on track,

with the hope of giving democracy a better chance
with a better constitution
four or five generations down the road.

I'd Trust Harris with that job as much as anybody we've got right now.

There was a time when I'd never have believed we could get this fucked up.

Two terms of Dubya wasn't ignominious enough?
We actually had a pigfucking orangutan in the White House for four years,
and now he's viable again?
 
Back
Top