politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
the plane is broken. some 1 in 4 of our countrymen believe a fascist lie. and you're still bickering over whether or not the senility of the pilots was a factor?
try this rather than handwaving over the airline decision: explain to me how a generation which fought the cold war ended up electing an obvious russian asset into its highest office without concluding that their politics has gone rancid in their old age.
send your 14 year old to the store for some smokes and then we'll talk
every adult has a percent chance every four weeks of devolving back to mush and after 65 that percent chance is just too high
I'm sorry the topic confuses you but yes, this is why your 14 year old can't have a driver's license even if they might be a perfectly good driver.
Risk of them becoming unable to execute the duties of the office is a main factor. It's ok to discriminate against adults for the qualities of a high risk of developing age-related degenerative disorders over the course of their tenure.
This isn't that hard to understand. Your line of reasoning is pointless.
A bunch of people are living in the delusional reality of an old person and it's pushing us close to civil war for no good reason beyond boomer mass dementia. You have failed to understand the present crisis, so you fail to comprehend the necessity for this simple preventative measure.
No more people over 65 in federal politics. Ever.
Age isn't the only risk factor I care about, it's just the only age factor I care about discussing with you.
Age limits are de facto term limits. If you want to make it 60 I'm willing to hear it.
This isn't about their values at all. You keep on mindlessly returning to your algorithm for evaluating candidates assuming that people can make a decision as to whether or not an old person is healthy. But we are living in the aftermath of people failing to make that decision.
If you don't believe this, you've failed a basic political awareness test. If you don't believe that Trump was unhealthy for this country and that a vote for him is a vote against our civilization, you've failed a basic political intelligence test.
Your model of how well people make these decisions is flawed, wrong, and irrelevant.
This is wrong. Health and age are deeply connected. If you can't accept that, you're failing a basic biological intelligence test.
Hint: There's nothing about a 28 year old that would make them unfit to be President. But our society has made the decision to set an arbitrary line at 35. There is no reason not to set a corresponding arbitrary line at 65.
There's no point continuing this if you can't read.