Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

DoctorJoJo

(1,134 posts)
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:00 PM Apr 2019

Let's Address the Ageism Elephant in the Room!

Ageism is written right into the Constitution, where it defines the minimum age to be POTUS—35. Why should there not be a maximum age? We’ve now had two presidents first inaugurated at age 70 (Reagan was 69 years and 348 days—close enough!) and The Orange Buffoon at 71.6. Reagan by the end had to have his wife whisper answers in his ear, and confused movies with real life. Trump already can’t pronounce ‘anonymous’ or ‘origins,’ and he confuses the Sicario movies with real life Mexico. Look, I like ALL our candidates, personally--Joe Biden is even my birth-mate. But the three B’s, as I call them, Biden, Bernie, and Bloomberg, are all 77 right now, with nearly two years to go to inauguration! Now add in two terms and we are talking about them needing drool catchers! How many organizations have mandatory retirement ages? The five Democratic Presidents in our lifetimes were first inaugurated at 43, 46, 47, 51, and 52, with Carter the oldest. I didn’t include Johnson (55) and Truman (60) because they first ascended to the presidency via death, but still, they were WAY under the three B’s! In this case Ageism isn’t discrimination; it is salvation, because we are talking about the POTUS!

60 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Let's Address the Ageism Elephant in the Room! (Original Post) DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 OP
I am will to stick with the original minimum with no maximum delisen Apr 2019 #1
An incumbent running for re-election is an incredible advantage genxlib Apr 2019 #3
We have may great candidates clamoring to take charge. delisen Apr 2019 #59
I agree. allgood33 Apr 2019 #6
Presidential campaigns clog up air space for so long and cost so much. Karadeniz Apr 2019 #30
I'm with you genxlib Apr 2019 #2
I've Been Pushing a Harris/Buttigeig Ticket DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 #7
That's the ticket I want as well! Merlot Apr 2019 #55
I had high school classmates (twins) who died of childhood leukemia at 16; Carter, who you mention hlthe2b Apr 2019 #4
Carter IS amazing, but we are talking well past the three-sigma scale here! DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 #14
Outliers occur in every age group and category. Thus the idiocy of age descrimination. hlthe2b Apr 2019 #17
WHO do you think you are? Interfering with a rant about why anyone over 68 should kill themselves. Blue_true Apr 2019 #47
Age should not be automatically disqualifying. The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #5
Clinton is only a year younger than the Cheetoh, and I don't recall hughee99 Apr 2019 #13
I Had An Issue In The Primary, But I'd Pick a Yellow Dog Over CheetoMussolini! DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 #45
Kennedy, Carter, Clinton, Obama makes four. You took out LBJ. Who's the fifth? Demit Apr 2019 #8
Age 51 was FDR and I DID mention both LBJ and Truman as ascending by death. DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 #11
You best not try to sell ageism to me. Paladin Apr 2019 #9
To the privileged... Act_of_Reparation Apr 2019 #36
Lacking objective evidence to support your premise, it's nothing but ageism. LanternWaste Apr 2019 #10
I'm thinking 65 would be a decent goal. DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 #12
Yes! patricia92243 Apr 2019 #16
No! The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #24
I thought we were talking Presidents. patricia92243 Apr 2019 #31
The presidency is an office job. The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #33
I thought We Were, Too!! DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 #42
How about being the Prime Minister of Britain during WWII? The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #48
Maybe do some research on Winston Churchill. Tipperary Apr 2019 #23
It's a practical consideration loyalsister Apr 2019 #15
Drumpf was still a scumbag when he was 35 Takket Apr 2019 #18
Yes He Was--and an Asshole, Too But .. DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 #38
I know several women in their 90s. None of them need "drool catchers" (gross by the way) Tipperary Apr 2019 #19
Well, Again I speak From Experience. I'm a Gum Chewer, and I've Drooled a Bit Lately! DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 #39
Three words: Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #20
Thank you. Tipperary Apr 2019 #21
Love me some RBG! lillypaddle Apr 2019 #25
I think she could, considering what she's done and what she's been through. The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #27
Well, we aren't looking for someone lillypaddle Apr 2019 #49
I guess so, along with Winston Churchill, Konrad Adenauer, The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #50
Agree 100% lillypaddle Apr 2019 #22
Thank You! Been There, Experienced That! DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 #43
Do we extend this to Congress and governors as well? nolabear Apr 2019 #26
Well, If You've Watched A few of the Doddering Repuke Senators, I'm Saying Yes! DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 #40
How about the Dems? We have Nancy Pelosi (79) and Maxine Waters (80), The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #51
The House Only Has a Two-Year Commitment, So Much More Leeway than Six or Eight! DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 #60
All people do not age alike. Because you can site two wasupaloopa Apr 2019 #28
Well, At 72 I Say Wait Another Five Years and Then Readdress the Issue DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 #44
Extending your argument, then Haggis for Breakfast Apr 2019 #52
Exactly treestar Apr 2019 #58
No maximum, no minimum DavidDvorkin Apr 2019 #29
A perfect example of why federal age discrimination in hiring laws are necessary Deb Apr 2019 #32
This is a creepy OP lunatica Apr 2019 #34
It sure is. Tipperary Apr 2019 #37
Yep customerserviceguy Apr 2019 #53
Because it would be dreadfully wrong, a betrayal of the Hortensis Apr 2019 #35
And There Are Geniuses at 34 That Are Currently Precluded! DoctorJoJo Apr 2019 #41
LOL, but precious precious few of them Hortensis Apr 2019 #46
Only until they turn 35. Excluding people over 65, or some other older age The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #57
You're addressing ageism by practicing it. Might as well exclude women, POC & LGBT folks, too. VOX Apr 2019 #54
It is on a case by case basis. Joe941 Apr 2019 #56

delisen

(6,044 posts)
1. I am will to stick with the original minimum with no maximum
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:04 PM
Apr 2019

nd I think a one term presidency is just fine.

genxlib

(5,528 posts)
3. An incumbent running for re-election is an incredible advantage
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:08 PM
Apr 2019

Giving up that potential advantage is a real risk.

delisen

(6,044 posts)
59. We have may great candidates clamoring to take charge.
Fri Apr 5, 2019, 12:07 AM
Apr 2019

If demands of the office are so great it may be better to let 4 years be the norm, have an active vp who will make a great candidate in 4 ears.

We don't need to amend the constitution to give voters less choice by setting arbitrary maximum age limits



genxlib

(5,528 posts)
2. I'm with you
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:07 PM
Apr 2019

This has been my mantra for months. I will support who ever gets put forward but I do think this should be a consideration.

On the other hand, Mayor Pete might be a little too young. He is extraordinarily impressive but I would prefer to see him season a little longer. Would love to see him in a role that would grant him that opportunity. Cabinet level probably but I wouldn't be upset about VP.

That still leave a solid bunch of candidates.

Merlot

(9,696 posts)
55. That's the ticket I want as well!
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 07:10 PM
Apr 2019

And speaking of VP's, I feel like Biden was using that meeting with Stacy Abrams as a bait and switch. A little birdee told me that Biden has his eye on a certain white, male governor as his VP favorite.

hlthe2b

(102,298 posts)
4. I had high school classmates (twins) who died of childhood leukemia at 16; Carter, who you mention
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:08 PM
Apr 2019

is sharp as a tack at 94. As anyone at the Carter Center or Habitat for Humanity.

On the other hand, as many as 5% of the population will develop EARLY onset dementia (as early as 35) and that may be on the rise.

Age and its effects are a continuum. People can die at any age. Someone in their 70s now would have already been dead-- statistically-- had they lived decades ago. There is no perfect predictive model and certainly, not one based on age alone to predict how well one's mental faculties will be sustained (if one ever had the intellect to begin with); nor can a crystal ball predict when someone will die sans an established fatal condition.

Blue_true

(31,261 posts)
47. WHO do you think you are? Interfering with a rant about why anyone over 68 should kill themselves.
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 05:31 PM
Apr 2019


Just in case that was not obvious.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,748 posts)
5. Age should not be automatically disqualifying.
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:09 PM
Apr 2019

They didn't put an age cap in the Constitution (and don't tell me people didn't live so long in those days; John Adams lived to be 90, was president in his 60s and continued to write right up until his death. The average lifespan was low because of high infant mortality but if you made it through childhood you had a good chance to live as long as people do now). We are, of course, entitled to consider a candidate's age, and the probability that they will not serve two terms, in deciding whether to vote for him/her. But to automatically disqualify anyone older than a certain age is, indeed, ageist.

hughee99

(16,113 posts)
13. Clinton is only a year younger than the Cheetoh, and I don't recall
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:32 PM
Apr 2019

Anyone having an issue with it in 2016. Yes, age should be considered but, as you said, it shouldn’t be an automatic disqualified.

Paladin

(28,266 posts)
9. You best not try to sell ageism to me.
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:21 PM
Apr 2019

I got a bellyful of it here at DU during the last campaign, from arrogant young Bernie supporters (yeah, I appreciated the irony). They gave me a world of shit for being old enough to (gasp!) remember details of the 1972 McGovern campaign. It's been a sore subject with me, ever since. I suspect others feel the same way.

Act_of_Reparation

(9,116 posts)
36. To the privileged...
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 03:18 PM
Apr 2019

...equality seems like oppression.

Pay off my student loans and then maybe we'll talk about the mean youngsters hurting your fee fees.

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
10. Lacking objective evidence to support your premise, it's nothing but ageism.
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:27 PM
Apr 2019

What then is the specific cut off age, and on what objective measure is that based on?

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,748 posts)
33. The presidency is an office job.
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 03:07 PM
Apr 2019

While I'm sure it can be psychologically stressful at times, so are many other office jobs. Being the CEO of Boeing, for example, is probably very stressful right now. Being on the Supreme Court, fo example, or in any court, isn't a walk in the park and judges often work long hours. Presidents do travel a lot, but they aren't sitting in a middle seat in coach; they're traveling in a flying hotel with all the amenities. They do a lot of meeting and greeting but so does the Queen of England, who is 92. They don't have to do any actual work outside the office since all their household chores are handled by others. If they don't want to or can't walk a few blocks to see the sights they can demand a golf cart. If they don't want to visit a soldiers' graveyard in the rain they can't be forced to do it. They aren't asked to chop wood or lay railroad track. They sit at a desk most of the time, at least those who aren't watching TV in bed with a tub of KFC, or waddling around a golf course.

Winston Churchill was in his 70s during WWII when he was the PM of England, and King Haakon VII, at age 70, was a hero of the Norwegian resistance. Benjamin Franklin was in his 70s during the Revolution. Nelson Mandela was elected President of South Africa at 75. Konrad Adenauer became the first chancellor of West Germany at 73 and served until he was 87 - just to name a few people over 65 who served ably in government.

 

DoctorJoJo

(1,134 posts)
42. I thought We Were, Too!!
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 04:07 PM
Apr 2019

There is no more pressure on earth than POTUS, unless you don't give a shit like Trump!

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,748 posts)
48. How about being the Prime Minister of Britain during WWII?
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 05:44 PM
Apr 2019

Churchill was in his 70s. How about being Chancellor of West Germany from immediately after the war and through most of the Cold War? Adenauer was in his 70s and into his 80s. That's as much pressure as any president is likely to experience.

loyalsister

(13,390 posts)
15. It's a practical consideration
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:38 PM
Apr 2019

Woodrow Wilson spent much of his presidency convalescing after a stroke.
Failing minds and bodies are natural and foreseeable in all of our futures, with symptoms and risks increasing with age.
It is reasonable to factor that potential in choosing someone for a job of great consequence.
In MO at least some of our judges are required to retire when they hit 70. It's sensible.

Takket

(21,581 posts)
18. Drumpf was still a scumbag when he was 35
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:42 PM
Apr 2019

The problem isn’t the age of these racist idiots, it is the racist idiots voting for them ruining everything.

 

DoctorJoJo

(1,134 posts)
38. Yes He Was--and an Asshole, Too But ..
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 04:00 PM
Apr 2019

... watch some interviews with him 20 years ago compared with the doddering Dotard he is today! Look--I come to this with a lot of unmatched personal experience: I have as much education as anyone, and I could still solve a differential equation, but I can't tell you how many times I can see a face in my mind but can't put a name to it! I'm guessing Jimmy Carter would tell you the same. It just IS a factor!

 

Tipperary

(6,930 posts)
19. I know several women in their 90s. None of them need "drool catchers" (gross by the way)
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:42 PM
Apr 2019

Bet they could walk miles around you.

lillypaddle

(9,581 posts)
25. Love me some RBG!
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:57 PM
Apr 2019

Can she get on a plane, fly around the world, land and attend gala celebrations and meetings long into the night, and then up at 6:00 am for more of the same? I don't think so. Good god, that's nothing against her. Age happens to everyone and it's foolish to believe it doesn't make a difference.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,748 posts)
27. I think she could, considering what she's done and what she's been through.
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 02:00 PM
Apr 2019

She has missed oral arguments only once in her entire career, even though she's had several bouts with cancer and recently had part of a lung removed. Being a Supreme Court justice isn't a walk in the park; it's actually a lot of work. And you don't have to work hard as president; just look at Trump, who spends most of his time either watching TV or golfing.

lillypaddle

(9,581 posts)
49. Well, we aren't looking for someone
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 06:00 PM
Apr 2019

who "works as hard" as trump, now are we?

Being President is PHYSICALLY grueling from what I can tell. RBG is amazing, and yes, she works hard. But it's not being President of the USA and leader of the free world. If you can't see that, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,748 posts)
50. I guess so, along with Winston Churchill, Konrad Adenauer,
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 06:07 PM
Apr 2019

Nelson Mandela, King Haakon VII and Queen Elizabeth II, who despite their advanced ages were/are capable heads of state during times of great crisis for their countries. I guess Americans just can't handle that kind of pressure.

lillypaddle

(9,581 posts)
22. Agree 100%
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:54 PM
Apr 2019

I'm 71 btw ... and everyone ages a bit differently, but those you mentioned are too damn old, period. I don't care what anyone says, being president is grueling work (except for trump), and there is no way 77 year olds have the stamina and energy that someone even 10 years younger has.



nolabear

(41,987 posts)
26. Do we extend this to Congress and governors as well?
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 01:57 PM
Apr 2019

After all, they make decisions that affect our lives every day. Nancy’s out, McCain would’ve been gone, Bernie would be out...

How about the President simply have to undergo an actual physical evaluation that includes neurological and other age related stressors to ensure they’re fit?

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,748 posts)
51. How about the Dems? We have Nancy Pelosi (79) and Maxine Waters (80),
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 06:25 PM
Apr 2019

who are two of the very best representatives in Congress.

 

wasupaloopa

(4,516 posts)
28. All people do not age alike. Because you can site two
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 02:16 PM
Apr 2019

people who had problems does not mean we all have problems,

I am 72 and went back to work as an accountant.

Nobody has to whisper in my ear nor am I as simple minded as trump.

 

DoctorJoJo

(1,134 posts)
44. Well, At 72 I Say Wait Another Five Years and Then Readdress the Issue
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 04:13 PM
Apr 2019

When I was a teen, I could spout the height/weight/college of every player in the NFL. Long story short, not today!

Haggis for Breakfast

(6,831 posts)
52. Extending your argument, then
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 06:29 PM
Apr 2019

we should have NO age minimum, because "All people do not age alike."

There are people who graduate from colleges (like Harvard or MIT) at 14. Have a PhD (or two) by the time they're 21.

So the issue here really isn't one of age. It's one of qualifications.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
58. Exactly
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 09:24 PM
Apr 2019

Different people are different. Cutting off things for any age is just wrong. There are people over the cutoff who can do whatever it is.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
35. Because it would be dreadfully wrong, a betrayal of the
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 03:10 PM
Apr 2019

humanist principles our nation was founded on. And remember, we're the party of liberalism. You know, the ones who believe to our cores in equality of all men and that every man is entitled to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness?

We should be thanking the Medical Revolution that we now have so many great, vigorous people of a broad range of ages. As your data indicate, in Jefferson's day the older generations were either dead or too medically fragile to undertake the journeys and other physical challenges involved in national service.

There's not nearly enough appreciation for this great blessing we are the first generations to have, that so many more people in their 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and even 90s now have the greatly expanded freedom good health gives to continue with work they find rewarding and/or needed, paid or unpaid. It's a magnificent gift our less-fortunate ancestors never imagined for us.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
46. LOL, but precious precious few of them
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 05:21 PM
Apr 2019

and genius has no linkage to good character, competence, or solid, stable personality and ability. Geniuses without the rest should stick to writing papers better people can evaluate. Maturity and experience, however, give contemporaries capable of evaluating honestly and thoughtfully an idea into all of them. That includes whether they honorably handle the temptations of a potentially highly corrupting environment.

With Trump in the White House, I really do not understand this current mania among some to elect people who can only be evaluated by their sales pitches.

Trump should be a profound lesson in the dangers of electing people who are not what their supporters thought they were. And it’s always wise to seek the opinions of people who know them rather than just relying on the pictures they draw of themselves.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,748 posts)
57. Only until they turn 35. Excluding people over 65, or some other older age
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 08:30 PM
Apr 2019

excludes them forever. Your 34-year-old genius can wait another year, and presumably will still be a genius, or an even smarter, more experienced one.

VOX

(22,976 posts)
54. You're addressing ageism by practicing it. Might as well exclude women, POC & LGBT folks, too.
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 06:51 PM
Apr 2019

Because there are plenty of right-wing nutcases who would argue that women, POC and/or LGBT folks are a “risk,” “unfit,” etc., based on racism, sexism, and homophobia— all of it morally wrong and unhealthy for democracy.

There are 35-year-olds who can’t be trusted to walk across the street, and 75-year-olds who can outthink, out-strategize, and run circles around people 30-40 years younger.

Yes, overall health is always a factor for ANY age. But a healthy 70-year-old today likely has another 25+ years left in the tank. (Unless Republicans destroy healthcare, Medicare and Social Security altogether.)

Want insurance? Make sure the VP candidate is someone who will be worthy.

 

Joe941

(2,848 posts)
56. It is on a case by case basis.
Wed Apr 3, 2019, 07:14 PM
Apr 2019

And this group of seasoned citizens are in good shape. They should not be disqualified.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Let's Address the Ageism ...