1508

Over 75% of voters want maximum age limit for elected officials, poll shows (www.axios.com)

submitted 1 year ago by ZeroCool@feddit.ch to c/politics@lemmy.world

324 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] K1nsey6@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago

So you advocate your style of politics with lifetime appointments? Certainly nothing authoritarian to see here

[-] fsmacolyte@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They're saying that politicians like AOC, Katie Porter, Sanders, etc. are high quality public servants, and that high quality public servants should be able to be elected as long as they have cognitive function.

On one hand, in a hypothetical and ideal scenario, that would be nice to have for us voters.

On the other hand, even if an elected official does great work and has a great track record, should they be able to just serve indefinitely until their brain gives out? There'd be a lot of potential problems such as having entrenched and corruptible political operators, even if they started out good, who prevent "fresh blood" from entering politics. It'd be neat to see a study comparing different countries and political systems where there are age barriers and term limits vs those that don't have them.

[-] K1nsey6@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

High quality public servants in who's eyes? I'm sure Republicans could argue someone like Rand Paul or Marco Rubio are a high quality public servant.

There would need to be a consistency across the board.

[-] fsmacolyte@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

I think that's their point: That maybe, as long as a candidate is mentally fit, then voters ought to be able to continue voting for them if they feel like the candidate is still worth voting for.

Honestly, if there was some kind of magical bullet to simply ban candidates who are mentally unfit (i.e. losing their marbles) from holding office that couldn't be exploited, I think a lot of people would find that preferable to an age limit.

That doesn't address issues like politicians who are too technologically illiterate to do things like open PDF files, though.

this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2023

1508 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19148 readers

2088 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News