Try the political quiz
@ISIDEWITHQuestionselectionsStarted 2yrs agoActive 2mos ago

Should politicians over 75 years of age have required to pass a mental competency test?

Countries that have mandatory retirements for politicians include Argentina (age 75), Brazil (75 for judges and prosecutors), Mexico (70 for judges and prosecutors) and Singapore (75 for members of parliament.)

578 Replies

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2yrs2Y

Yes

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2yrs2Y

Yes, and politicians of any age should be required to pass a mental competency test

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2yrs2Y

Yes, and ban anyone over the age of 75 from running for office

 @9LWTP72Conservative from British Columbia  agreed…8mos8MO

Depending on the individual, being over 65 can cause severe inadvertent mental side effects stemming from a decline in mental acuity which can start at the age of 50 in some individuals.

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2yrs2Y

No

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2yrs2Y

No, mental competency is too subjective

 @9LWTP72Conservative from British Columbia  disagreed…8mos8MO

The use of mental competency testing has proven to filter out mentally incompetent individuals from flying a plane. This drastically reduces the risk of planes crashing and passengers becoming injured. The same should be applied to an individual placed in control of a countries entire population and well being.

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2yrs2Y

No, I would prefer term limits instead

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2yrs2Y

No, this discriminates against older politicians

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2yrs2Y

No, our government needs experienced leaders

 @9XMKKT4from Saskatchewan  answered…2mos2MO

No, only if there exists substantial evidence to prove their potential senility should they be obliged to take a mental competency test

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

How can younger generations benefit from or be disadvantaged by mandatory retirement ages in leadership positions?

 @9TMSGHQLiberalfrom Alberta  answered…3mos3MO

I think that a mandatory retirement age gives us something as a goal.

 @9JWWFBKfrom Ontario  answered…11mos11MO

Mandatory retirement should be initiated at 75, along with Term Limits for all elected roles, and the senate should be banned or elected.

 @9FMDLYLfrom Ontario  answered…1yr1Y

Nobody above age 70 should be able to run

 @9FF5G76from Ontario  answered…1yr1Y

Just cap the age at 70 instead

 @9D3WWDSCommunistfrom Saskatchewan  answered…1yr1Y

No, there should be an age limit of 70 for running for public office.

 @9CYGHXWfrom Ontario  answered…1yr1Y

Only if there is enough evidence to suggest the test is necessary.

 @9CQ8CWTfrom British Columbia  answered…1yr1Y

No, but require psychiatric evaluation every 2 years for politicians aged 80 years or older

 @9D36K4QLiberalfrom British Columbia  answered…1yr1Y

It depends. There's a legitimate argument to be made, as older people have more health issues which could impede decisions, but younger people also have that to some ability, so I would say we should be more cautious.

 @9CTX96PNew Democraticfrom Saskatchewan  answered…1yr1Y

Yes and I also think every politicians be required to take it

 @9CQJF7Lfrom Ontario  answered…1yr1Y

No, as there is a minimum age requirement, there should be a maximum age requirement. Mental tests can be subjective, but a full health check would be better. We should know if a candidate is terminally ill or not.

 @99MWZYPfrom Ontario  answered…2yrs2Y

No, but those older than 75 shouldn't be able to run

 @9XPB2DT from Pennsylvania  answered…2mos2MO

Yes, and politicians of any age should be required to pass a mental competency test

There many senior citizens of who are able and well mind. Ageism is not the answer

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

Can you share a time when you noticed someone's abilities didn't match with societal expectations due to their age?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

What are the pros and cons of having age limits for high-responsibility roles, like politicians or judges?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

How does the concept of 'age equals wisdom' fit into the debate on mandatory retirements for certain professions?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

In what ways might mandatory retirement ages impact the diversity and representation in politics or judiciary?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

If you had the power, what criteria would you set for someone to remain in a professional role as they get older?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

Imagine a scenario where a highly skilled leader is forced to retire due to age. How would that affect society's progress?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

Is there an age at which people should no longer make significant societal decisions? Why or why not?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

What alternative measures could be taken to ensure that professionals remain competent in their roles without setting age limits?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…3mos3MO

How would you feel if your favorite public leader had to retire at a certain age, regardless of their abilities?

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1mo1MO

Vetting Fiasco: Trump's Defense Pick Caught in Sexual Assault Allegation Storm

CNN commentator and New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman said President-elect Donald Trump’s team missed Pete Hegseth’s payoff to a sexual assault accuser when they vetted him to be secretary of defense.Hegseth is among a raft of cabinet picks facing tough confirmations, and who aren’t being subjected to the customary FBI checks, instead being vetted by private firms. Over the weekend, Hegseth’s attorney dropped the bomb that there was a confidential settlement with a woman who accused the former Fox News host of sexual assault. On Monday night’s edition of CNN’s The Source with Kaitlan Collins, Haberman revealed that her sources in Trump world did not know about the payoff, which was missed in the vetting “because it was a private settlement”HABERMAN: There’s more concern from some people around Trump than there is from Trump himself, about this whole issue. Trump has really dug in, and has told advisers that he is going to stick with Hegseth. Now, we’ll see if anything else emerges.They did do a vet, we are told. This did not show up, this issue, because it was a private settlement, according to the people, who were briefed on what took place. Trump really likes Pete Hegseth. But this did introduce the thing Trump doesn’t like, which is an element of surprise and a negative headline. And so, we will see where this goes.

▲  59 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2mos2MO

Inside the Podcast Revolution: Trump’s Unfiltered Strategy and Harris’s ‘Meltdown’ Risk

Tech billionaire Elon Musk attributed President-elect Trump’s election victory, at least in part, to the lengthy podcast interviews he did during the campaign.In an interview late Tuesday with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, Musk said Trump’s podcast appearances showed the American public that he was a normal person.“I think it made a big difference that President Trump and soon-to-be Vice President Vance went on lengthy podcasts,” Musk said in the interview.“I think this really makes a difference because people look at, like, Joe Rogan’s podcast, which is great, and Lex Fridman’s and the All-In podcast, and, you know, to a reasonable-minded, smart person — who’s not, like, hardcore one way or the other — they just listen to someone talk for a few hours and that’s how they decide whether, you know, you’re a good person, whether they like you,” he added, according to a clip highlighted by Mediaite.Trump conducted many interviews with new media during his campaign, as well as with legacy news organizations such as Fox News.Last month, he joined Joe Rogan’s podcast for a 3-hour long interview. The celebrity host later endorsed his candidacy.His opponent, Vice President Harris, did not appear on Rogan’s podcast because, according to “The Joe Rogan Experience” host, the Harris campaign only had an hour and required him to travel to her. Rogan said he felt “strongly” that the “best way to do” an interview with the vice president would have been in his studio in Austin, Texas.Musk recalled posting on his social platform X account that “nothing would do more damage” to Harris’s campaign than going on Rogan’s podcast, “because she would run out of non-sequiturs after about 45 minutes.”“You can’t hide for three hours,” Carlson replied.Musk added, “Yeah, like, hour two and three would be a complete melted puddle of nonsense. So it would just be absolute game over. That’s why she didn’t go on.”“But on the other hand, Trump, he’s there, and there’s no, there’s no talking points,” the Tesla CEO continued. “He’s just being a normal person who’s having a conversation, and doing three hours of Rogan, no problem.”

▲  349 replies

Active 12hrs ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…6 days6D

Defense Bill Blocks Transgender Care To Minors

The Senate on Wednesday gave final approval to a defense policy bill directing $895 billion toward the Pentagon and other military activities, moving over the objections of some Democrats who opposed a provision added late in the negotiations that would deny coverage for transgender health procedures for minors.The 85-to-14 vote, coming a week after a divided House passed the same measure, cleared the bill for President Biden’s signature.Most Republicans and many Democrats supported the measure, which provides a 14.5 percent pay raise to junior enlisted service members and a 4.5 percent pay raise for all other service members. It also expands access to meal assistance, housing and child care programs that benefit those in uniform.But several Democrats withheld their backing in protest of a provision preventing TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for service members, from covering “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization” for children under 18.The language, which would affect the gender-transitioning children of service members, was recently added to the measure at the insistence of Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana, who refused to bring a defense bill to the House floor without it, according to aides familiar with the negotiations.Twenty-one Democrats, led by Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, proposed an amendment to strip the provision from the bill, but the matter was never brought to a vote. Several of them took to the floor on Tuesday to lodge their objections.“It’s flat-out wrong to put this provision in this bill and take away a service member’s freedom to make that decision for their families,” Ms. Baldwin said, estimating that the provision could negatively affect as many as 6,000 to 7,000 military families.

▲  1913 replies3 agree