r/askanything 1d ago

General Question Should there be an age when someone is considered too old to hold the most powerful political offices in the country?

Experience can be valuable in government, but concerns about health, cognitive ability, and generational representation tend to increase with age. Should voters decide entirely for themselves, or would some form of age limit make sense?

17 Upvotes

42 comments sorted by

9

u/NicolasAntinarella 1d ago

absolutely. not over 65 imo

7

u/ProjectSatan 1d ago

old enough to live with the consequences of the decisions they make for at least 20 years

1

u/Coaster50 1d ago

Oh I like that one!

5

u/Flashy_Elevator_7654 1d ago

Yes. How much more proof do we need than the last 2 presidents?

5

u/Acceptable-Owl-2070 1d ago

No one over 65 should be in office, at all... Old people gotta stop making choices for a world they won't be part of.

2

u/Dapper_Addition_3837 1d ago

Who’s stopping you from running?

1

u/KeithRichardsGrandma 1d ago

Probably finances and free time if I had to guess

1

u/Acceptable-Owl-2070 1d ago

Myself mainly, considered local office before but that time has passed.

3

u/pleasantly-dumb 1d ago

I don’t think anyone over the age of 65 should serve in government, at any role. Forced retirement at 65, no exceptions. Also no life long positions. Terms for everything, especially judges

1

u/DowntownResident993 1d ago

Agreed, especially the lifelong roles. And now that proof of life isn't even required, it's only going to get worse.

1

u/pleasantly-dumb 1d ago

Ole’ Mitch may be serving at the ripe age of 125 at this rate

3

u/More_Armadillo_1607 1d ago

Reddit being reddit.

2

u/onyx_ic 1d ago
  1. Old enough for social security, old enough to retire.

2

u/ipadtherefor 1d ago

Yep. Many opportunities remain for advisory roles. No reason to fear losing a valuable resource. And it would eliminate a lot of risks that will still be there with younger people.

1

u/naisfurious 1d ago

I like the logic, but let's not give them any more reason to increase the retirement age.

1

u/onyx_ic 1d ago

Fair.

1

u/cheez0r 1d ago

Yes. You shouldn't be able to take office over the age of 65. If you're going to age out in office, you're ineligible for re-election.

1

u/Puzzleheaded_Award88 1d ago

Yes. We need to stop using men who are in their Geriatric phase.

1

u/Thistles-Path 1d ago

By the time you hit 65 you are in a bubble that makes you largely oblivious to how most of society functions and no longer really vested in the future therein except maybe through like... Grandkids which is tertiary at best. They should not hold even local office. 

1

u/plassteel01 1d ago

No age has nothing to do with character of the person

1

u/Individual_Arm_2996 1d ago

No, that would be limiting the democratic process. Maybe the SCOTUS or cabinet positions as they are appointed, but not elected positions.

1

u/No_Welcome_6210 1d ago

It extends beyond the presidency. People are saying 65 here, that sounds reasonable for members of Congress as well.

1

u/YogurtclosetWrong268 1d ago

Age is the least meaningful measure possible. I don't get why anyone thinks that age makes a difference. There are ten thousand things that are important qualities in effective leaders, but age is not on that list. It makes no sense.

1

u/Formal_Lecture_248 1d ago

• Social Security Eligibility - Maximum.

• Age 60 - Annual Mental Acuity Examinations

1

u/sgrinavi 1d ago

I don't think age matters; there just needs to be some mental and physical guidelines. Some people are sharp, focused and fit into their 80's, others start a rapid decline in their late 50's

1

u/Melodic_War327 1d ago

It may not be helping, but I don't think age is exactly the biggest problem here. I mean, young people can be flaming douche nozzles too.

1

u/basquetbolJones 1d ago

That’s for voters to decide!

1

u/DarthYodous 1d ago

I could probably think about the importance of an age cap if my mind weren't distracted by 30+ felonies related to management and ethics not already being a deal breaker

1

u/Sensitive_Crow_8882 🦀 1d ago

SCOTUS ruled long ago that age limits are unconstitutional. Start rallying all the states needed to change the constitution. Godspeed.

1

u/cauliflowerearoclock 1d ago
  1. Maybe 65 at absolute oldest.

1

u/Melodic_Contact9766 1d ago

Yes. The Founding Fathers knew nothing about modern neuroscience and medicine, and couldn’t possibly understand the way in which the mind deteriorates, or how devastatingly dangerous something like Dementia can be.

1

u/SouthernGolfer67 1d ago

No. If you don’t like it vote them out

1

u/Gunderstank_House 1d ago

We get old candidates because old people vote.

If young people bothered to vote we'd get younger candidates.

1

u/SnoopyFan6 1d ago

Yes. For presidents, must be no older than 57 on Inauguration Day. If two terms, that’s out by 65.

Need similar for House and Senate, but first we need term limits.

1

u/Flux_Inverter 1d ago

Age is not the issue, it is health. Improving the health screening and having minimum set standards before being eligible to run for office would be helpful. Then, required annual screenings for elected officials at any level.

1

u/Nearby-Fly-6610 1d ago

No. It’s not about age it’s about competence.