DaveLovesDee

Thanks, all...

I think if you keep mentally active, you're less likely to get dementia, apparently.

Maybe it's time for an Amendment to bring in upper age limits and number if terms served for Senators and Congressmen, though I doubt it would pass.

Jerseygirl

Yes I will go along with that …no politician over the age of 65 should be allowed to run for office.

scrubbedexpat099

Me too

BristolUK

I bet you waited years to be able to say that

Former Lancastrian

I am not 65 yet but I feel offended that I wouldn't be able to run for office according to some on here. After what would be approx 42 years of public service why shouldn't I be considered to lead the country?

As a PM/President I would only use the Govt jet for official visits and I would request that most meetings occur on alternate Saturdays in Manchester UK at Old Trafford before the game. I would save taxpayers a bundle as I am not into caviar and champagne and would probably serve pie and chips at state dinners. I don't need a mansion with 15 bedrooms and 20 bathrooms but the thought of a penthouse condo with either mountain/ocean views is appealing. Don't need a chauffeur I can drive myself and the condo probably comes with an underground parking spot. I hate wallpaper so that should save money when redecorating and I am OK with the 77" TV being wall mounted. Other than that I would let my elected staff do their jobs and not interfere.

caretaker

65 is a low bar, considering how many world leaders have gone far past that and remained effective. Tito, De Gaulle, Churchill, Roosevelt, I'm sure there are a lot. To prevent dementia in office (which can strike at any age), have them get their heads read every year or two, and re-test for driver's license at the same time. There are too many wrinklies out there using their cars like big lethal walkers.

Lion in Winter

I would say that at the moment, needing vast personal wealth is more of a worry than age when it comes to achieving high political office.

Former Lancastrian

So basically the 50 bucks in my bank account won't cut it then? Who knows how to set up a Go Fund Me page?

robin1234

I am so frustrated by the stupid hoops that candidates have to jump through to raise money from small donors. It is still 14 months before the election. They’ll write, “we need to raise $xxx before midnight tonight” or, “Robin, did you see in the news today, my Republican opponent is pulling ahead of me …” or whatever.

Never mind that, although you can be (relatively) confident the incumbent will be running, the challenger can’t possibly be known until next years primary. So they are asking you for money to try to win in the primary, which I absolutely won’t do.

So you can see the advantages of selecting people who are multi-millionaires as candidates ..

scrubbedexpat099

They should only be allowed to raise money through OnlyFans

zzrmark

I'm sure I'm not the only BE member that has no idea what that means, care to explain?
Are you suggesting that politicians should get naked to raise funds? That they are all chasing the dollar without putting in any effort? Or do you just like to choke the chicken while selecting your, carefully researched, candidates?

Lion in Winter

And consider, on the other hand, how those with wealth and perhaps even more importantly how those with wealthy friends and those who are the desired objects of influence from wealthy corporate and industry interests are inevitably influenced and beholden. It's political patronage that simply disenfranchises ordinary voters and ordinary candidates.

scrubbedexpat091

If only the US would ban corporate and union donations and limit individual donations, we have that in BC for provincial elections, sure parties and candiates have to come up with more creative ways to campaign, but we in general have more down to earth policiticans, it of course hurts one party more than the other, but end of the day both parties suffered a bit, as the left leaning party no longer gets its millions from labor unions, and the right leaning party no longer gets millions from corporate and wealthy donors, and the election after the changes not one corporate or union donor in the top 20 donors, and since personal donations are also limited the ultra rich still can't hand over massive sums of money.

That said it's harder to run as a candiate here because the parties themselves cherry pick candiates, you can't just say, I am going to run under this party banner, the party has to choose you, so in some sense the US is a little better as anyone can basically run under any party they want, but we also have no primary elections here either.

Pros and cons to both systems, one pro of the US system is its a lot more difficult to whip party members to vote with the party, where here its pretty easy, PM or Premier says vote this way and the MP or MLA doesn't vote as told, they get kicked out of the party, so for anything important may as well not even have a vote in a majority government as pretty much everything will be rubberstamped through.

I guess no system is perfect, seems a tad easier though for a nut to take over in a parlimentary system since tis easier for the nut to surround themselves with MP's who support the nut, its happening in the US as well, but its a little harder since the parties have less control over things, Joe the nut republican can run but so can Jane the sane one, and Jane may win and not support the nut in power.

The more you think about it, the more it becomes pretty obvious we really just largely rely on those in power to follow the rules, get the right nut into office, with enough nuts in the legislature and enough nuts on the supreme court and before you know it, you have some nut in power for life doing anything they want.

scrubbedexpat099

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/13/polit...tee/index.html
​​​​​​Why this House retirement could be a canary in the coal mine for Democrats

Sounds like he may not be alone, after all lots of oldies in a similar situation who must be thinking the same thing.

Giantaxe

According to this article ten Democrats are retiring and nine Republicans. So pretty even in numbers. But the article then says "However, when you dig into the specific reasons that are likely behind each retirement, it does look like Democrats are more worried than Republicans."

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...2022-midterms/

I would presume the Repubicans will regain the House next year given that's the pattern of mid-term elections and the amount of gerrymandering that's going on.