rgio wrote: 
You have a serious reading comprehension issue.

.


 kurtster wrote: 

 kurtster wrote:
I wasn't blaming anyone.  Even when you say multiple administrations, you name Biden, Harris, and the ever present deep state enablers.

As a recovering Republican, any suggestion that the Right supports education, especially public education, is foolish.  Betsy DeVos was a disaster. 

Do Dems get carried away....absolutely... but overreacting with rhetoric like the Republican position on CRT only makes things worse.

 rgio wrote: 
I guess that you missed where I said "for two generations".

By standard definitions that would be around 40 years.

And not that your statement that I was responding to was not a classic oversimplification.

 rgio wrote: 

 kurtster wrote:
A classic oversimplification of a really complex issue. Education has changed a lot over the years, and it’s influenced by many factors—not just one administration. Should we discuss "no child left behind"?  

Not that my earlier point about an ill-informed electorate needed a poster child— but your take shows how easily the politically-driven misinformed can derail a critically important discussion.  It's shocking how many of the "under-educated" suggest they can fix a system they struggled in.   

 kurtster wrote:

Nope. See "private Christian schools" - i.e., a refuge from "those" people, where kids can learn good Christian values, that abstinence is the only way, and that there's no such thing as evolution. Like those of the Klan, Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and the Republican Party: the party that has a President who's said they want to do away with the Department of Education. You can't pin that racist, hypocritical, ignorant stuff on "the same people that brought you Biden" as a distraction. Doesn't work.

 Isabeau wrote:

No, I mean a maximum age in office. 65 is mandatory retirement.

 rgio wrote: 
Well that ship sank long ago.  Torpedoed by the same people that brought you Biden and then Harris.  They have been "educating" our kids for two generations now.  The indoctrination is complete.

 haresfur wrote:
👍

 rgio wrote:
The fatal flaw in your argument

 rgio wrote:
The fatal flaw in your argument

 Isabeau wrote:
We don't need a rule... we need an educated electorate and compelling options.

We also need to return to a time of full transparency in politics.  Every dollar in support of every candidate should be visible.   We should know who is buying what, and allow voters to consider their options.

Lastly... we need to educate about the process and the system.  Too few people understand how government and elections work.  What the debt ceiling is, and how tariffs work. 

An informed, educated electorate would not have ended up here.  We're the problem... and an age limit won't fix that.

A maximum age to run for Prez at 65?
if makes it two terms = 73. Sounds ok to me.

 Red_Dragon wrote:

So should not being convicted of a crime, but...

 Red_Dragon wrote:

I think it makes sense. Maybe more sense than the minimum age. A younger person can gain experience but an older person is at risk of serious cognitive decline, even if they are competent when elected. These sorts of laws are kind of broad-brush but often necessary. There are people outside the range that would probably be good and effective as president, but it is important to avoid the disasters.

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

Well, that should go without saying, but...

 Red_Dragon wrote:

Having a brain should also be a prerequisite IMHO

 black321 wrote:

I'd be fine with amending the constitution to include a maximum age as well. Say, 65.

 black321 wrote: 
That they can fool all (or enough) of the people all of the time.  Which they did, until the debate.

 black321 wrote:
Reagan? Biden? Trump?  Doesn't matter, the answer is money and power, see also Pelosi and McConnell....Thurman, Feinstein, Grassley, Rogers, Waters, Clyburn... Jesus, that's just off the top of my head. 

 islander wrote:

yup. there's already a minimum age right?
but come on, what where the insiders thinking when they propped the old man up to run again?