What's new

Article II modification

Article II modification


  • Total voters
    45

Roc Doc

2A SNBI
Joined
May 20, 2020
Member Number
580
Messages
2,752
Loc
Way out West.
So Article II of the US Constitution states that you have to be at least 35 years old when you take office. Is an upper age limit needed as well? Sure some people are fit as fuck into their 80's, but let's face it most are slipping by that point, I clearly remember how fast Reagan fell apart in the latter part of his second term, and there's really no way to predict what will happen to these old dudes. The stress of the job, even if you don't understand the job (Trump), puts an enormous amount of strain on the physical body and the older you are the harder it is to deal with it. Also, I think these really old candidates, (Bob Dole, Joe Biden, etc.), are not really in touch with the major part of the population.

I propose the POTUS has to be 35-65 when they take first term office.

Or?
 
Ageist :flipoff2:

I do agree though, electing people that really should be in a home isn't working out too well for us.
 
What about Pelosi? She's what? 80? Bet you want to suck her tits too :flipoff2:

They do look huge!:flipoff2:

Her, Mitch and most of the .gov, if I'm that old I don't want to be doing shit but relaxing and enjoying my retirement. Bunch of sociopaths.
 
I do not think the problem is that we have old senile people running for president, we have people that will vote for them.+
if we did have an upper limit, 65 is to low.

I would much rather see term limits for all government positions across the board.
2 terms president
3 terms congress
xx years Supreme court etc
 
if we are changing the constitution, instead of upper limit on the age, id trade you for a change in removing birth-right citizenship instead.
 
if we are changing the constitution, instead of upper limit on the age, id trade you for a change in removing birth-right citizenship instead.

Can we add tax contribution as a qualification for voting while we’re at it?

Or better yet, just make taxes :cough: theft :cough: gone altogether?
 
On the flip side, we wouldn't get another Trump or Biden either. I'm leaning toward it being a risk worth taking.

Well...if it pans out you'll get your chance to find out with Harris. You'll get what you fucking deserve.
 
Upper age limit, TOPS 65, more like 55 imo. Plus should be limited to having some kind of education outside of law/politics, and should be limited to like 8 years for a "political career" and then have to go back into the work force. Politicians shouldn't be a career choice, you should be in a normal age range, and you should have history of a normal fucking life prior to politics to show some vague understanding of how people work.
 
I'd rather limit voting to those who can prove a net tax liability. If you are not helping to pay the bills then you should have no say over how the money is spent. And let's face it, EVERY decision government makes is about how to spend the money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMG
For voting on principle instead of sucking whatever limp dick the GOP tells me to?

If you say/think Trump has not been good for this country then you're a bigger idiot than I've given you credit for. If not for him the supreme court would be stacked against us and the constitution. And we may now get to see it happen anyway.
 
You sure been acting like a democrat in your posts.

You live in California, you should know the difference.

If you say/think Trump has not been good for this country then you're a bigger idiot than I've given you credit for. If not for him the supreme court would be stacked against us and the constitution. And we may now get to see it happen anyway.

He has been great for slogans, given the media a fuckton of ratings, and managed to NOT fuck up some stuff like staying out of totally new wars for the most part. Pray tell, how would Biden stack the court? By murdering justices? Or by playing FDR and adding judges the way people always proclaim the "enemy party" will?

Overall things weren't as bad as they could have been for sure, but great? I disagree. He fucked up hard over the past year with covid, undoing much of the good that came over the previous 3 years.
 
You live in California, you should know the difference.



He has been great for slogans, given the media a fuckton of ratings, and managed to NOT fuck up some stuff like staying out of totally new wars for the most part. Pray tell, how would Biden stack the court? By murdering justices? Or by playing FDR and adding judges the way people always proclaim the "enemy party" will?

Overall things weren't as bad as they could have been for sure, but great? I disagree. He fucked up hard over the past year with covid, undoing much of the good that came over the previous 3 years.

You're a bigger fucking idiot than I ever gave you credit for...seriously.
 
If you pick the 35 -65 option you'd never get another Reagan as POTUS. Bunch of short sighted people here.

Dumbass, he's a prime example. Reagan was clearly in Dementia during his second term. They hid it the best they could, like they did with FDR and his polio, and Reagan waited 5 years after he was POTUS to announce it, but he was clearly befuddled in his second term, mixed up movie scenes with actual history, etc. Dude was sharp as a tack his whole life up until the latter part of his second term. So OK, you could say we got 6 good years out of him, but if Article II was modified like I propose, he likely would have stepped up his bid for the GOP nod.
 
if you are going to try to change the COTUS I'd rather focus on term limits
 
If you pick the 35 -65 option you'd never get another Reagan as POTUS. Bunch of short sighted people here.

Or Reagan would have started his political career earlier.
 
Top Back Refresh