When it comes to age on the ballot, Texas didn’t wait until 2024 to weigh in.
Asked to let judges stay on the bench until they’re 79 years old — a year younger than President Joe Biden — Texas voters soundly rejected the proposal in Tuesday’s elections, a defeat that drew new attention to issues of age and fitness for office in the U.S.
“Age is front of mind for American voters in a way that it has not traditionally been and they are nervous about it,” said Cal Jillson, a political science professor at Southern Methodist University.
Others cautioned against broader takeaways. At least four other states have rejected similar proposals over the last decade, according to the National Center for State Courts. And states that have passed the measures have mostly done so in close votes.
Pretending we dont decline mentally past the age of 80 is a very stupid take.
These are the people who lead our communities. We need them to be in peak mental health.
Then disqualify people on the basis of mental decline.
And we’ve seen how well that’s been working for aging boomer politicians…
Look at Feinstein. They literally had to pry that seat from her cold dead fingers.
Ideally, you’re correct and I would agree. Unfortunately, that’s not how it works in reality.
I’ll counter with the example of Bernie Sanders, who is 82 years old, still sharp as a tack, and arguably the furthest left person in the federal government. Jimmy Carter is 99 years old, and while I know we’re not hearing much from him anymore, he’s been an incredible force for good well into his nineties. (Yes, I know he hasn’t held elected office since early 1981, but he damned well could have, and done it well.)
Yes, Feinstein should have retired a very long time ago, not because of her age, but because of her mental decline.
deleted by creator
The way to avoid that, and to respect individual differences, is with standardized periodic testing, which I would support for sure.
Of course, standardized testing. Thats never failed categorically to assess entire generations on a grand sweeping scale.
And yet you think an arbitrary age line is more reliable?
Yes. Every time, 100%, yes.
You shouldnt be in power at that age. Your body is either failing, beginning fail, or could fail within minutes.
Lets even set aside the massive mental degredation, of which the outliers are few and far far far between. Hows your heart? Your liver? Your thyroid? How many politicians have to have sneaky hidden surgeries and procedures to hide their failing bodies from the public? (Spoiler, its a lot)
These people are supposed to lead nations. Thats like trusting the lead sled dog pulling life saving supplies across the tundras of the north to the 20 year old husky who is missing an eye and a hind leg.
This isnt even about disabilities. You cannot out-fit the passage of time. Your body cant out juke aging. And we know the human limits are sputtering out by that point regardless of your natural levels of ability.
They. Dont. Need. That. Power. They need to retire, care for their health, and enjoy their final years. They dont need to hoard power like some pathetic sniveling dragon guarding a pile of gold.
The only reason we dont have that no brainer limit already is because the walking mummies arent willing to give up their thrones. Because they crave power. Which is proof they do not deserve it, and need to go.
deleted by creator
Or we can disqualify them based on “we know youre declining because of basic biological fact, and you dont need to be so fucking obsessed with power that you cling to it at 80 fucking years old, step down and retire.”
How so?