Do you think the minimum age for US President should be raised to 40?

I’m almost 40. I’m fine with the current age.

There should be a maximum age of 50.

“The Constitution gives three eligibility requirements to be president: one must be 35 years of age, a resident “within the United States” for 14 years, and a “natural born Citizen,” a term not defined in the Constitution.”

I’m OK with all that, but there is a good case for age discrimination in there. Our citizens are supposed to have full rights when they reach their majority, which is usually considered 21. One of those rights is to run for presidential office, if one so chooses.

I’m 63.

By the way, in Deutschland, anyone of voting age is eligible to become Kanzler.

And really, do you really think an 18 year old is less qualified than Trump?

No. I don’t see a reason for any age restrictions.

I’m 44.

@Espiritus_Corvus I thought we reached age of majority at age 18? I still don’t understand not being able to drink alcohol until 21.

I’m thinking there should be a minimum IQ requirement of 40 or so, though I’ll probably be in the minority on this, too. Maybe an additional requirement of no more than 40 lies per speech, as well.

I would much rather see the abandoment of the teleprompter more than anything

If you are old enough to vote you should be old enough to run. Hopefully through those crazy things we call elections we would pick the qualified people.

And I know… Trump

And I totally wouldn’t mind that if you are over 80 you can no longer vote.

@JLeslie -what’s the rationale for changing it?

I agree that if you’re old enough to vote, you should be old enough to run.

I forget what 35 amounts to today, versus the founding father’s day. 65? In any case I’m given to believe that President was meant to be a post-retirement position. Your fortunes made, and your time now dedicated to your country.

During the American Civil War, George Armstrong Custer was the amazing “boy general.” If he could be so effective so early in his 20’s, someone else could be as president at 35.

With the current train wreck of a Presidential election, I don’t even want to think about things like this.

Like a Bush, Trump could conceivably buy the Presidency for his son, who would then be a 2 term ex-President billionaire and about 50.
The American political system is on perilous ground.

@elbanditoroso I’m not gung-ho about changing the age. I was just talking to someone about it, and wondered what jellies thought, and then I thought to ask about other countries too. We talked about parenting also, specifically very young parents, but that’s a different subject.

When I think of myself before the age of 30, and most people I know before the age of 30, it’s insane for me to imagine any of them as president. But, that doesn’t mean there couldn’t be some fabulous 25 year old who is brilliant at the job. I just think it’s very unlikely.

I understand why people might say as soon as you can vote you should be able to run for president. Or, that anyone can run and it’s up to the American people to decide. It’s just that sometimes we have these sort of rules, or laws, in case the people are not thinking straight.

I would say a minimum of 40 but a maximum of 57 or 61 when they start so that the oldest they can be is 65 if they do 8 years or only run for one term to the age of 65 if they ran at 61.

Then I think they should all be required to take an IQ exam. They must show that they still have the intelligence to understand complex ideas. And demonstrate that they understand our constitutional laws and be able to interpret them correctly.

They should all also have get a physical that shows that their brain isn’t damaged in any way by injury or illness and pass a psychological exam.
I remember when my BIL went to school to be a guard for Embassy duty. He had to pass, mental and physical exams and psychological exams and IQ exams. We require more from out Embassy guards than we do our Presidents. And all their finances are looked over with a fine tooth comb.

I think the same should happen with our Senators and Congressmen. I know our political system is suppose to be available for anyone one to run but really. Do we need fools who blow in any direction the wind would blow? We don’t do it with our FBI, or our CIA so why should we let a bunch of other people who can actually hurt our country get away with this crap
I not suggesting the samy physical like the embassy guys have but at least a physical to determine their health is ok and won’t interfere with their mental health.

Minimum age 9, maximum age 20, for Congress too – that’ll clean things up in a hurry, and get some non-corrupt people in there.

Well the first rule will probably be that pot will be legal everywhere. And depending on how many 9 year olds there are, there may also be a law for mandatory play time of 4 hours and school can’t be any longer than 2 hours 3 days a week.

I think the age of the candidate is irrelevant, as is the requirement that the President be born within the country. To me the great crisis in THIS country is around the cognitive shortfalls in the voting population along with the growing percentage of people choosing not to vote.

@stanleybmanly I don’t think the born in this country thing is sticking. The rule is born a citizen. Ted Cruz ran for president and he wasn’t born in America.

@JLeslie You can run for President if you were born on Mars. There’s no law stating that you can’t run, only that you can’t BE President. Had Cruz arrived at the position currently held by Trump it is a certainty that his eligibility would be challenged and now working its way through the courts. As with other Constitutional issues the vaguely worded “natural born” thing would leave Cruz open to legal challenges, and you can bet those challenges would be mounted.

I really don’t see how five years would make any difference. Trump was a shallow, arrogant dilittente when he was in college as he is now. His progress is a reflection of a large part of the society he comes from. Take a look around you. Look at the type of people who are getting all the media attention. Look at the characters that people wish to emulate. Look at what we’ve become.

I really don’t see how age is a guarantee of more responsible behavior. All I have to do is go down to the Yacht Club and I am surrounded by often wealthy post-50 year-olds, mainly of neo-conservative political bents, who feel they’ve “made it” and use their life of leisure to act like absolute idiots most of the time. It’s embarrassing.

I think that there shouldn’t be an age limit.
I do come from Australia though god knows if there is a limit here
but there are some deadly smart people in their twenties. They get the struggles that other people have a bit better, they get that finding a job is hard, and they understand the modern stuff
Really, I don’t know if I am making an ounce of sense today

@Espiritus Corvus That’s it exactly. Who gives a shit if a candidate is 8 years old as long as he or she has the chops for the gig. As the current situation clearly demonstrates, an exceptional 8 year old might well be preferable to a conceited codger with the temperament of a pouting child of 8.

As a fun side note: not too long ago, the 5 year old mayor of Dorset, MN lost to a teenager, and then the teenager lost to a 3 year old. The 5 year old’s brother.

35 seems appropriate. By that time a person should have fully made the transition to adulthood.

Does there need to be a minimum age? I’d rather see us identify the qualifications that would make the ideal candidate.

@Pied_Pfeffer Like what? Education level? Prior government experience?

Someone with proven skills in leadership, management, communication, and strategy come to mind first. Someone with an education in political science and economics. Someone with business ethics and common sense.

@Pied_Pfeffer And, what? Make these prerequisites mandatory? By law? Add an amendment to the constitution?

Not prerequisites, but guidelines that we agree on. If they have these skills, then they should be able to provide a business plan on how to accomplish their goals.

It’s actually pretty depressing just how infrequently our political choices boil down to actual qualifications. The truth is that for the most part, the best and the brightest are exactly the folks with the sense to recognize politics for the seamy businsess it really is.

I feel if you’re eligible to vote then you should be eligible to run for President. Setting age limits (minimum or maximum) is stupid.

@Pied_Pfeffer “but guidelines that we agree on”

And there lies the rub. Try coming to a solid consensus about what qualifies as proven leadership, management, etc skills. Some folks will say that Carly Fiorina has these proven skills and saved Hewlet-Packard from dissolution. Others will say that she’s an inept moron who cost 30,000 people their jobs and got ran out of the company by her own board of directors. Some will say Trump is a proven leader. Others will point to his numerous personal and professional failings.

And common sense? Ha! one person’s common sense is another person’s idiocy.

Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. was the youngest man ever to become President when McKinley died in September, 1901. He was 42 year old. Given our history, what does it matter? I know of no one who ran for the office, as a major candidate, at the age of 35.

(Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. was born in October, 1858. His son, Theodore Roosevelt III is almost universally called Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. That’s BS—accept no substitutes, insist on the real McCoy.)

Oops . . . i’m 65 yeas old, but don’t tell anyone . . . ‘K?

The life expectancy in 1901 was less than 50 years, @Setanta, and Teddy wasn’t elected at the age of 42, he ascended.
Sometimes a VP seems to be chosen as insurance against possible assassination.

The law’s not likely to change, and I don’t know that it should. But the intent of the original founders seems to have been that a retired or semi-retired businessman would lend his expertise to the Executive Branch for a few years.
IMO.
:-)

Welcome to Fluther, be ye carnate or re.

I did not,of course,say that he was elected. He became President.

Thank you for the kind welcome—I promise not to nuke the place.

@ibstubro, “life expectancy” (especially prior to the discovery and prevalence of antibiotics) has more to do with causes of premature death which increase a society’s mortality in toto, bringing down the average as a whole, than it does with “how long could a person reasonably expect to live” at a certain time or in a certain place.

Even in Colonial and Revolutionary America, Benjamin Franklin’s attainment of 84 years of age was not all that remarkable… once he became an adult male, and wasn’t involved in occupations that suffer from high mortality.

“Life expectancy” has more to do with child-bearing women dying in childbirth, infant mortality, childhood infectious disease, death by misadventure and accident, and such other causes which prevented adults from reaching “old age”. A “societal life expectancy of 50 years” doesn’t mean that it’s exceptionally rare to see 50+ year-olds. (Even Neanderthals had a fair amount of “old folks” from what has been discovered so far.)

@CWOTUS Has it right. Before modern medicine extremely high rates of childhood mortality and dying during childbirth skews the average. As does high risk occupations before modern safety standards. Once you reached adulthood however, barring accident, you stood a pretty high likelihood of living well into old age.

If McKinley hadn’t died in office, Teddy would have been either 46 or 50 before he would have run for president – 50 or 58 on leaving office – and he died at age 61.

(Good bullshitter catch, @CWOTUS & Darth_Algar. I was trying to shorten the argument by slipping the ‘life expectancy fallacy’ by the new guy.)

Roosevelt took office at the age of 42—I was not concerned with “might have beens.”. My point is tnat there seems to be no good reason to change the age of eligibility for tje office..

I agree with you that there seems to be no good reason to change the age of eligibility, @Setanta, and my “might have beens” were for the sake of discussion, not argument.

I will close my remarks with an observation on politicians by Mr. Samuel Clemens:

“Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress; but I repeat myself.”