• CompostMaterial@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Old, yes, they are both old. Not elderly, but old. The minimum age for a present is 35. I would very much like to start seeing younger presidents that will be more in touch with what current issues really are and can energize a younger generation of voters.

    And yes that was exactly my point on having a white man as an anchor.

    • BuelldozerA
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      5 months ago

      Old, yes, they are both old.

      I don’t feel that 59/60 is “old”, especially not for people who take care of themselves.

      I would very much like to start seeing younger presidents that will be more in touch with what current issues really are…

      In general I agree with you but there’s a solid argument that POTUS / VPOTUS should be more experienced and that comes with age.

      And yes that was exactly my point on having a white man as an anchor.

      I apologize if I misunderstood your comment but you started with “It is obviously a cycle we need to break.” and I disagree with that. There’s no “need” to break a cycle of proportional representation (assuming we can actually get one). There’s nothing inherently noble or superior about having both the POTUS and VPOTUS both being non-white and non-male simultaneously. It should not be prevented but it’s also not some kind of achievement that needs to be unlocked.

      Walz was a good choice and not just as an “old white guy anchor” but also because his politics and beliefs are in line with many Americans. He’s an electable person regardless of his skin color and gender.

      • doctordevice@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        IMO 59/60 should be about the max for a first term president. That would put them at retirement age if they serve two terms. I think Walz is a great choice to make the whole thing more palatable to progressives like me (who feel that now for a third time in a row we’ve been deprived of a fair primary). I do wish the VP were a little younger than the president to set them up for a run of their own afterwards. Not sure if Walz has any intention of running afterwards, but we’d be right back to a retirement age candidate if Kamala serves two terms.

        Personally, I’d like to see more presidents in their 40s or early 50s. That’s plenty of time to get “experience” while still in principle being able to understand the needs of the majority of people. Plus it helps that they’ll still live for a while in the world they shape after their term.

        • CompostMaterial@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Thank you for being more articulate in your explanation of the age issue than I was. I agree whole heartedly. 64-65 is retirement age, I like to see presidents that are experienced but not at what would normally be the end of their working years.

          Personally, I’d like to see a max cap for ALL elected officials at 70.