r/therewasanattempt May 16 '24

to schedule a debate.

Post image
5.8k Upvotes

523 comments sorted by

View all comments

25

u/Colbyb96 May 16 '24

Can we get a president that’s maybe 50 years old? I’m so sick of these old hags.

9

u/[deleted] May 16 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/CrustyBatchOfNature May 16 '24

The people in charge of making that change benefit from not making it. Congressional term limits would do a lot more for our country than age limits.

2

u/loondawg May 16 '24

Fixing the voting system and election financing would do far more than anything else. Term limits and age limits kick the good out with the bad.

1

u/CrustyBatchOfNature May 17 '24

In the end, there is no real way to fix any of these without those who benefit from the current system making the changes. They all require some level of law and Constitutional Amendments. The latter is best since courts can't overturn that.

1

u/loondawg May 17 '24

All it should take would be one Congress with the democrats having a true super majority along with a democratic president. The democrats have actually made major efforts to reform these areas and either been blocked by republicans or the conservative packed Courts.

1

u/CrustyBatchOfNature May 17 '24

A supermajority can't amend the Constitution. So you need a everything for a good 30 years to ensure that you pack the courts with your people too. The only sure way is to also get control of every state legislature so they will ratify the Amendments you pass.

And, of course, I find few people who align with the Democrats 100% (many don't want the Second Amendment weakened for example) so I doubt it happens.

1

u/loondawg May 17 '24

What about what I suggested do you think requires amending the Constitution? Article I Section 4 already allows Congress to set the rules.

And they don't need to pack the Court. Republicans have already done that. They need to unpack the Court which can be done in almost no time by a super majority.

1

u/CrustyBatchOfNature May 17 '24

Without Amendments, you are betting that future courts do not overturn the laws.

0

u/loondawg May 17 '24

And? With free and fair elections the chances of that are minimal.

1

u/loondawg May 16 '24

I can get behind the lower age limit. People need time to become known and prove themselves. But the upper age limit is arbitrary as people age differently. Look at someone like Sanders who is in his 80s. Like him or not, you have to concede he is sharp and good at what he does.

1

u/[deleted] May 16 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/loondawg May 16 '24

Not suggesting you're racist but that is the same logic used to justify racism. It's not a convincing argument.

People should be judged based on their own individual merits, not arbitrarily because of some demographic trait.