$20.00
Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
20 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Greyocracy rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Given the palava over Clinton's health, and Trumps refusal to come clean on his is it time to set a maximum age you can stand to be president, and if so what should that age be?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Reagan defied the odds, and didn't get ill until post presidency, although his last year may be questionable, I think he started losing his memory before he left office. I am not a fan of feeling obligated to show private medical records to prove your health. But i might be wary about voting for an older candidate, if their VP pick is weak, in my view. In general, however, most VP picks are simply mouthpieces that are very similar to the candidate, so if you don't like the Presidential pick, more than likely you won't like the VP pick either. If it's an issue for you, just vote for someone else, but my guess, age of the candidate is not a swaying factor in most peoples votes.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
mb
HE also openly & blatantly "defied logic & decency etc."as 'moi' RECOLLECT a 'poster' whereinupon he 'admonished':
wow ~"A Brain is a terrible thing to waste... 'money' on!"
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Fox
United States
Richardson
Texas
flag msg tools
Question everything.
mbmbmbmbmb
Mental decline happens at different ages, but by age 70 over 50% of people have substantial cognitive impairment. Pretty much no one escapes completely. If I had to pick a set age I'd say 65 is the oldest I'd want a president to be, meaning their first term should start by 59 at the latest. By their mid 70s a very high percentage of people have lost enough function that they have trouble managing their day to day affairs, much less making decisions which affect the entire country.

The interesting thing with cognitive decline is that the ability to speak coherently doesn't seem to decline as much, if at all, compared to things like the ability to reason, learn, and remember. A president needs to be able to actually process and understand what is going on around them, not just sound like they do. Reagan was a good example of that, he was still pretty good in a debate even though he was clearly (in hindsight) already showing substantial effects of alzheimer's in 1984.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Woodcock
United States
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Love the liberal revisionist history in this thread.

But generally yes, I think the Founders should have put a maximum age of election (I guess you could serve a term if you were right on the edge) in the Constitution. A move towards an amendment along those lines would probably have my support.

I'll mention it to them once I've got my time machine completed as well.



Ferret
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelsey Rinella
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
I am proud to have opposed those who describe all who oppose them as "Tender Flowers" and "Special Snowflakes".
badge
Check out Stately Play for news and reviews of games worth thinking about.
mbmb
Nope. I'd much rather have the political process take care of this concern. Medical advances may well make a huge difference in the onset of such decline, but an amendment would be very difficult to keep up-to-date. Plus, I wouldn't want any segment of society to feel cut out of the political system to any degree without a very important concern voting was unable to address.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Woodcock
United States
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Drew1365 wrote:
Ferretman wrote:
Love the liberal revisionist history in this thread.

But generally yes, I think the Founders should have put a maximum age of election (I guess you could serve a term if you were right on the edge) in the Constitution. A move towards an amendment along those lines would probably have my support.

I'll mention it to them once I've got my time machine completed as well.



Ferret


250 years ago, you could already be pretty "elderly" at 50 years old.

Today it's a completely different story. I'm over 50, and I'm in great shape.

It would be hard to put a maximum age on the Presidency, and certainly one written in at the founding would not be entirely applicable today.

Minimum age makes sense. Young people are stupider than they know.


All very good points. Perhaps some type of mental capacity/agility test then?



Ferret
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelsey Rinella
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
I am proud to have opposed those who describe all who oppose them as "Tender Flowers" and "Special Snowflakes".
badge
Check out Stately Play for news and reviews of games worth thinking about.
mbmb
Ferretman wrote:
All very good points. Perhaps some type of mental capacity/agility test then?


Again, if voters think refusing such a test would be disqualificatory, it's effectively compulsory without the need for additional law or amendments. If the voters don't care about it enough to make it effectively required, it probably shouldn't be actually required.

EDIT: I also think we should amend the Constitution to remove the age and natural born requirements, for the same reason. The whole reason we think those requirements make sense is that most people agree on them, but if most people agree on them, that's exactly why we don't need them. If, at some point in the future, an exceptional candidate comes along whom the voters would elect but for those requirements, it's probably the requirements which are wrong, not the voters.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J.D. Hall
msg tools
Ferretman wrote:
I'll mention it to them once I've got my time machine completed as well.



Ferret

Don't mention the womyn getting the vote -- don't want to freak those boys out!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J.D. Hall
msg tools
Drew1365 wrote:
Minimum age makes sense. Young people are stupider than they know.

Totally agree. Hell, they keep wandering into my yard!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ron Preisach
United States
East McKeesport
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Drew1365 wrote:
Ferretman wrote:
Love the liberal revisionist history in this thread.

But generally yes, I think the Founders should have put a maximum age of election (I guess you could serve a term if you were right on the edge) in the Constitution. A move towards an amendment along those lines would probably have my support.

I'll mention it to them once I've got my time machine completed as well.



Ferret


250 years ago, you could already be pretty "elderly" at 50 years old.

Today it's a completely different story. I'm over 50, and I'm in great shape.

It would be hard to put a maximum age on the Presidency, and certainly one written in at the founding would not be entirely applicable today.

Minimum age makes sense. Young people are stupider than they know.


So, things that people thought were good ideas 250 years ago might not be good ideas now? Hmm... curious.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J.D. Hall
msg tools
edgerunner76 wrote:
Drew1365 wrote:
Ferretman wrote:
Love the liberal revisionist history in this thread.

But generally yes, I think the Founders should have put a maximum age of election (I guess you could serve a term if you were right on the edge) in the Constitution. A move towards an amendment along those lines would probably have my support.

I'll mention it to them once I've got my time machine completed as well.



Ferret


250 years ago, you could already be pretty "elderly" at 50 years old.

Today it's a completely different story. I'm over 50, and I'm in great shape.

It would be hard to put a maximum age on the Presidency, and certainly one written in at the founding would not be entirely applicable today.

Minimum age makes sense. Young people are stupider than they know.


So, things that people thought were good ideas 250 years ago might not be good ideas now? Hmm... curious.

Like equality under the law? The citizens getting to choose lawmakers and chief executives? Freedom of religion, speech, and protest? Own a gun? Require the government to have a warrant before entering your domicile and conducting a search for evidence of a crime?

Yeah, those ideas -- sheesh, dumbass old white guys. What the hell were they thinking?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Austin Andersen
United States
Berrien Springs
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I think that if you have to vote someone into office, it will work itself out in the end. I'm more concerned with mentally unhealthy senior citizens that still have access to cars.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Lexington
Kentucky
flag msg tools
admin
mbmbmbmbmb
Ferretman wrote:
Love the liberal revisionist history in this thread.

Such as?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
George Washington was born on February 22, 1732, in Westmoreland County, Virginia. Washington served as a general and commander-in-chief of the colonial armies during the American Revolution, and later became the first president of the United States, serving from 1789 to 1797.

So he was 65 when he refused a third term.

John Adams born in 1735.
He was president from 1797 – March 4, 1801.
So he was 66 at the end of his term.

Thomas Jefferson was born on in 1743 and later served as president of the United States, from 1801–09.

So he was 66 at the end of his second term.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Helmut Hohberger
Germany
Munich
Bavaria
flag msg tools
Quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur
mbmbmbmbmb
Ferretman wrote:
Perhaps some type of mental capacity/agility test then?


"Have you endorsed, voted for, or contemplated to vote for, Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election?" should serve admirably for the forseeable future.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
edgerunner76 wrote:
Drew1365 wrote:
Ferretman wrote:
Love the liberal revisionist history in this thread.

But generally yes, I think the Founders should have put a maximum age of election (I guess you could serve a term if you were right on the edge) in the Constitution. A move towards an amendment along those lines would probably have my support.

I'll mention it to them once I've got my time machine completed as well.



Ferret


250 years ago, you could already be pretty "elderly" at 50 years old.

Today it's a completely different story. I'm over 50, and I'm in great shape.

It would be hard to put a maximum age on the Presidency, and certainly one written in at the founding would not be entirely applicable today.

Minimum age makes sense. Young people are stupider than they know.


So, things that people thought were good ideas 250 years ago might not be good ideas now? Hmm... curious.
It's why I oppose a written constitution.

Imagine if a maximum age had been in there, and the difficultly of changing it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
bbblasterfire wrote:
I think that if you have to vote someone into office, it will work itself out in the end. I'm more concerned with mentally unhealthy senior citizens that still have access to cars.
There have been a few incidents related to old people not knowing just how blind they are.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.