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

  • Kalcifer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The issue with enacting a mandatory age limit in a democratically elected government is essentially conceding to the idea that the voters are unable to determine for themselves whether an elected official is competent, or not. This has substantial, and serious implications.

    • TheLurker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      You mean like how most places don’t let you vote before you turn 18 because it is accepted that children have not developed the cognitive ability to make sound decisions in regards to electing officials?

      That kind of implication?

      Yeah old people don’t have to see the failures of their poor decision making skills. They lack the understanding that their ideas and ideals are based in a world that no longer exists.

      I think once you get over 80 it is time to step aside and let the world move forward.

      • Kalcifer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You mean like how most places don’t let you vote before you turn 18 because it is accepted that children have not developed the cognitive ability to make sound decisions in regards to electing officials?

        This is a strawman argument. OP was talking about an age limit for elected officials, whereas you are now talking about age restrictions on the voters. Yes, we are both talking about cognitive decline in decision making; however there is a substantial difference between putting an age limit on those who can be in power vs. putting an age limit on those who can decide who is in power.

      • aidan@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are plenty of perfectly capable and intelligent people until the day they die. People are individuals not the average of their demography.

        • TheLurker@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          And there are plenty of capable, smart and thoughtful children as well.

          That’s not how laws work. Laws are made for the 1% that fuck it up for the rest of us. Or they are made based on the average.

          You can’t have laws that are based on individuals, they have to be broad by definition or else they are unenforceable or they are oppressive towards certain groups.

          Also the average of a demographic is exactly that. The average. To suggest that no-one is the average is either nieve or disingenuous.

          Demographics, like most things are a bell curve and most of us are no more than one standard deviation from the mean.

          • aidan@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I agree, I oppose a minimum age on holding office as well.

            You can’t have laws that are based on individuals, they have to be broad by definition or else they are unenforceable or they are oppressive towards certain groups.

            Yes you can and do, thats why courts exist

            Demographics, like most things are a bell curve and most of us are no more than one standard deviation from the mean.

            Any bell curve across hundreds of millions of people has hundreds of thousands to millions of outliers.

            Also the average of a demographic is exactly that. The average. To suggest that no-one is the average is either nieve or disingenuous.

            Basically no one is average across a sufficiently large number of discriminators.

        • talkstothecat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          For me, the main issue isn’t the increased risk of cognitive decline, it’s the fact that I share very few life experiences with people born before the invention of color tv, and someone who has another 5-15 years left will be less impacted by policy decisions than someone who’s going to be around for another 50-60 years. Octogenarians are not representative of the majority of the population and, in a representative democracy, I think that is important consideration.

    • Rakonat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      We already have restrictions on other government jobs about how old you can be. And we also have term limits on the office of the President.

      It’s not breaking new ground or saying anything new that Congress and other elected officials should not be able to serve in excess of 10 years.

      • Kalcifer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        We already have restrictions on other government jobs about how old you can be.

        For the sake of clarity, are you referring to the minimum age limits of U.S. government officials?

        It’s not breaking new ground or saying anything new that Congress and other elected officials should not be able to serve in excess of 10 years.

        My argument isn’t that it should be avoided because of it’s novelty, I’m saying that, in order to justify such rules, one must be of the belief that the voters are unable to determine the competency of who they elect. Given that a democracy is founded upon the idea of a government ruled by, of, and for the people, it is of paramount importance that the people be able to make such decisions for themselves.

        • Rakonat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The same logic that a person can’t serve in an office until they are a specific age is just a valid reason they can’t serve over a certain age. If constituents are supposed to be trusted in determining the competency of who they want to elect there should be no age limits at all.

          President has a 2 term limit, so there is no reason Congress or Justices should not also be subject to predefined limits to how often they can hold an office, to say nothing of other elected officials down the line.

          • Kalcifer@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            If constituents are supposed to be trusted in determining the competency of who they want to elect there should be no age limits at all.

            This is the opinion that currently I hold.

            President has a 2 term limit, so there is no reason Congress or Justices should not also be subject to predefined limits to how often they can hold an office, to say nothing of other elected officials down the line.

            My argument isn’t that of whether it’s possible to make such rules, it is instead, from a point of principle, whether we should make such rules.

    • Vespair@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      And yet we have minimum age requirements. Why does your bullshit argument about voter autonomy not apply there?

      • Kalcifer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        My argument is based on principle; therefore, it would be in opposition to any such restriction whose purpose is to “ensure” the competency of the candidate.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Why do you assume people like minimum age requirements either?

        The Constitution is difficult to change. I’d get rid of the “natural born citizen” bit too.

        • Kalcifer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Out of curiosity, what is your justification for removing a natural born citizen clause?

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t believe that being a natural-born citizen adds any value to potential elected leaders in the modern era.

        • Vespair@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You’re right, America would totally be better if we let preteens and foreign assets hold major legislative seats, totally wise outlook you’ve got on the topic here 🤡

          • kava@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            “Foreign assets”

            So if somebody came at 5 years old, grew up their whole life in the US, was a citizen, and millions of Americans wanted to pick them as their president…

            They shouldn’t be accepted because they’re a foreign agent?

            In my opinion you’re either a citizen or you’re not. There should be no difference.

            • HerbalGamer@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s kind of what they built the country on, didn’t they?

              That, and slavery of course. But that’s a different discussion.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I don’t think many people would vote for preteens or foreign assets.

            Running a campaign does not mean you win, and if you’re unlikely to win, you’re unlikely to get enough support to run.

            Also foreign-born Americans can be elected to the legislative branch. Ted Cruz is a notable example.

            Might wanna know what you’re talking about before calling someone a clown.

    • Chickenstalker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah. What if one of the Dunedain came out from the shadows with the sword that was reforged and ran for President? What then?

      • dx1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Btw wasn’t that human girl he was after like 16? What was up with that?

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        He wouldn’t be a natural born American citizen and thus couldn’t run.

    • Toadiwithaneye@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Obviously people are picking incompetent election officials since we have quite a few, when you are given choices the selection of choices is important too. People are being given limited bad choices and choosing the lesser of evils. We have too many of these old timers who spend their days sleeping through important decisions or/and just being led by others.

      • Kalcifer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        People are being given limited bad choices and choosing the lesser of evils.

        What’s interesting about this statement is that I interperet it as saying that the candidates that the voters are considering are pre-chosen by some independent third party that the voters have no control over. I would argue that, as it currently stands, in the U.S.A, for example, there is no such gatekeeper – the DNC or, GOP are not gatekeepers as the voters could choose to simply ignore them, and vote for an independent; however, from what I can tell, the issue certainly seems to be that the general public thinks that they only have two choices so they vote accordingly. This is quite possibly a symptom of the FPTP voting system, but I am not knowledgeable enough on the matter to say conclusively.

      • Kalcifer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I would argue, with a rather high degree of confidence, that this would never occur. If it did, it would certainly indicate a complete degredation in the core functions of the government, as well as the trust that the public has in its operation – I suspect that a revolution would be imminent. Furthermore, due its unstable nature, I would wager that it would be rather fleeting.