Biden endorsers changing the fillibuster

Answer me guys, am I wrong about this ? Am I figuring this wrong?

The youngest man to ever be president was Teddy Roosevelt. He was 42. But that was only because McKinley was assassinated.

JFK was the youngest guy ever elected. He was 43.

So yeah. It doesn't speak well that a good many of our latest presidents have been ancient.

Joe Biden - 78
Donald Trump - 70
George H.W. Bush - 64
Ronald Reagan - 69

Every one of these guys are so old that they had grandchildren when elected. How on earth can people that old have the first idea of where the country is at that moment, let alone where it's going?

The only thing they can tell you is where it's been and the way things were. Both past tense.

Meanwhile, our youngest presidents were real leaders and the country did quite well under their leadership:

Theodore Roosevelt - 42
John F. Kennedy - 43
Bill Clinton - 46
Ulysses S. Grant - 46
Barack Obama - 47

What we find is that the younger, the better.

Oh, and other than Trump our worst president ever was of course James Buchanan. He was 65 when he was elected.
 
Yea, Buchanan was bad! History tends to forget that. And, don’t forget GW Bush was a village idiot, part of the Bush crime family, that screwed us over rotten.

And, what an anti-Christ Reagan was, can’t emphasise that enough.

The only one to break all of those rules above was the ONE.... FDR The 4 Term sage that went against everything with everything against him ( including no legs ) that beat the curve !

The One. But, not really anyone has done it since.

LBJ worked his ass off. Battling with the Kennedy’s for his great society. He had some successes. And some wins, some enduring ones. Medicare, and others. Unfortunately, the Vietnam war got the better of him, and consumed what more he could have done, ———— He lost the young people in the end.

Bobby Kennedy was without question going to be the next president of the United States of America 🇺🇸 Everyone knew it !!

He had it all.

And, they shot him !!
 
Being in my late 30's I can honestly say that all I've ever had as president are old farts except for Clinton and Obama. And if John McCain hadn't picked a batshit crazy bitch as his running mate we would have had him to add to the list of old fucks completely out of touch with the times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gomez Adams
65 should be it. Nobody over 65 has any business being in the government. At 65 you're out of touch with anything the future is going to hold and your old ass needs to go and make room for the people that will live to see the laws they make. I'm sick to death of old, useless career politicians passing laws or shooting laws down because they know they'll be fucking dead by the time the tab has to be paid for it all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gomez Adams
65 should be it. Nobody over 65 has any business being in the government. At 65 you're out of touch with anything the future is going to hold and your old ass needs to go and make room for the people that will live to see the laws they make. I'm sick to death of old, useless career politicians passing laws or shooting laws down because they know they'll be fucking dead by the time the tab has to be paid for it all.

Perhaps 30 years ago but medicine is moving up the human age and with that cognizance is also increasing in age. Currently, I'd put it more at 73-75 but very shortly (a decade) that should move to 80.
 
I agree with @Grimhogun

It's not how long you live. It's how long you have lived already.

When you're a young adult, 18 to 25, you're pretty much the person you're going to be over most of your life with few exceptions.

By the time you're 35 to 40, you're set in a groove that you'll be in for the rest of your life. You don't change from that point on barring a life altering event.

So by the time you reach 65, you've been living the same way with the same beliefs and the same outlook for decades. You're NEVER going to change at that point.

That's when you become worthless as a public servant. You need to be in the area of life where there are still possibilities, where your mind can still be changed by new events.

When you're 65, it's too late. You need to go and make way for people that can still be open to a future different from the one old farts are perfectly happy to live our their days in that they themselves created.
 
I don't know. We've got just as many douchebags in their 40's fucking up the country as we do old farts in their 60's and 70's. They're all pretty much fucking worthless.
 
What the hell are all of you going to do when human life exceeds 110?
People keep making arbitrary ages where things can or can not happen anymore but keep forgetting the human life span is elongating.
Maybe I'm too much of a futurist.
 
What the hell are all of you going to do when human life exceeds 110?
People keep making arbitrary ages where things can or can not happen anymore but keep forgetting the human life span is elongating.
Maybe I'm too much of a futurist.
With people like Grassley that think women shouldn't complain about sexual assault because it's a compliment and blacks should still be property?

Yeah. You're too damn old and you should go.

The guy is 87. He was in his 20's a decade before the Civil Rights Act became law and still acts as if it never happened.

Again, it's not how long you live. It's that time has made your views obsolete and you have no want or ability to change anymore.
 
And he's also outside either age I suggested.

As far as time making your views obsolete, Bernie is still a 'socialist' (age 79 and apparently part of the leading left edge) and Matt Gaetz (age 38 years) will probably always be an asshole.

It's not physical age (young/old) but the ability to foresee, modify, and adapt that made the best leaders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gomez Adams