this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2024
1088 points (96.7% liked)

Political Memes

5404 readers
3290 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (4 children)

President should not be older than 65, period.

Why 65 specifically? Why not 64 or 66?

[–] IzzyJ@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

65 is supposed to be the age of retiremenr for a normal career

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

65 is supposed to be the age of retiremenr for a normal career

"Supposed to"

In Washington DC it's 67. In Virginia it's 61. In 1991 it was 57. It's based on arbitrary convention, not for any medical reason.

[–] IzzyJ@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Well, that should be standardized then, and 65 seems like a nice median

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Well, that should be standardized then, and 65 seems like a nice median

Based on what?

I've known high energy 80 year olds who were sharp as a tack and 50 year olds with early onset dementia or who were just plain nuts to begin with.

This isn't about age.

[–] IzzyJ@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Well a law is a hell of a lot harder to enforce if it's not drawing a line somewhere in the sand, and I'd rather disqualify someone we should than qualify someone we shouldn't

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Perfectly happy to draw a line in the sand, it should just be based on what we care about - competence, intelligence, experience, not being a raging psychopath... that kind of thing. Saying 65 is too old is no better than saying 35 is too young.

[–] crank0271@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

I like all of those things. Can we draw the sand line now?

[–] Thief_of_Crows@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Youre entirely right. How exactly will you enforce a law that says "unless youre still sharp as a tack at 80", though? There has to be a provable line or else the law is meaningless.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

All candidates for elected office should undergo standardized cognitive and psychological testing. The latter should include things like personality and bipolor disorder tests and some kind of personality test if there even one that is roughly valid (I don't know). These tests should not bar anyone from office necessarily but the results should be made public so voters can assess for themselves. These tests should be completed immediately after the candidate files to run.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

65 is a typical pension age. We could make it 60 too, really

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago

Lol because...?

[–] troglodytis@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago