86% of Americans Say Biden Is To Old To Be President

[Terrywoodenpic]

Eighty-nine? You're clearly too old to have observations that warrant serious consideration.

Absolutely. As soon as people start give up seats for you, you are too old to be listened to.
I retired at 65. And was well aware that I had slowed down. But was still retained as a consultant for a further year.
I am still far from daft, but definitely not up to the task of a full time job. I stopped driving this year, for the same reason. Though I know people go on driving till they drop.

Likewise Biden might be consulted from time to time Ike past presidents, but he is clearly not up to the job as president.

I would put a limit of 70 for any government, administrative or elected post.

 

[metis]

I thought it would be a cakewalk for Dems with the abortion crackdown but the border issue is going to hurt them I think.

But the House Pubs shot it down because of Trump, so this may well come back and bite them in the butt.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Bidens frailty is clear for everyone to see

Everyone could see Stephen Hawking's physical frailty too. And that it didn't affect his mind.

. I am 89 and am steadier than he is.

Cool. I'm 43 and I've been a giant clumsy klutz since I was a kid. It hasn't interfered with my cognition though.

When he is questioned he often looks entirely vacant and takes time to gather his thoughts.. his actions over trade and energy show his attitude to the UK and Europe.. he might live to 100 but not in a fit state to govern.

Oh no, a guy who takes time to "gather his thoughts" before responding to a question! The horror!

If this is the worse we can say about Biden, I'd say that's not so bad. Especially compared to ....

Trump is unfit to govern now through his mental state and insanity as well as his professed dictatorial. Desires.. he is more likely to be assassinated than die naturally in office.

Yep.

 

[metis]

I think I'd much rather have a president who gathers his/her thoughts than one who lashes out minus even the most basic decency.

 

[F1fan]

I have a question—which follows from the thread topic—on which I'm interested to read others' perspectives: when some people called for Ruth Bader Ginsburg to step down during Obama's presidency due to her advanced age and increased likelihood of passing away during a Republican president's term if she didn't step down during Obama's, were they being ageist or otherwise unreasonable? Why or why not?

RBG was in and out of hospitals for treatment of cancer, and with her advanced age the calculation was that she might pass away during a Trump term, if he won. It seems the calculation was needed since the selection and confirmation of SC justices is way too political and allows for a low standard with only a 51 senate confirmation. As we now know Trump did win, and he was in a position to select three highly questionable justices, primarily because of their known attitudes towards abortion access. It illustrates the importance of electing competent and ethical leaders, and age is a very low consideration.

 

[F1fan]

Absolutely. As soon as people start give up seats for you, you are too old to be listened to.
I retired at 65. And was well aware that I had slowed down. But was still retained as a consultant for a further year.
I am still far from daft, but definitely not up to the task of a full time job. I stopped driving this year, for the same reason. Though I know people go on driving till they drop.

You do understand that not all humans age the same, yes? Some decline faster than others, yes? Some die in their 70's while others can live into their 90's and even to 100, yes? If so, then we can't use averages and norms as judgment to any specific person and have a sound conclusion, agreed?

Likewise Biden might be consulted from time to time Ike past presidents, but he is clearly not up to the job as president.

Based on what data and observations? I ask because I see a guy who is doing the job, and making sound decisions and prudent actions. I hear democrats and republicans say that Biden is lucid and well informed in meetings.

Have you met with Biden yourself? If not, should I trust your limited judgment over those who actually do meet with Biden?

 

[F1fan]

I have a question too, how many of the 86% of Americans polled were influenced by rhetoric, disinformation, gossip, insults, this topic being mentioned in the media, etc., which would affect their judgment?

Let's not forget about 50% of Americans reject evolution, and a similar percentage supports Trump, a corrupt former president who faces four criminal trials for misconduct, so there is a basis to question the reasoning abilities of at least half of Americans in any polling where assessment of media and judgment is involved.

The poll number doesn't tell us that Biden is unfit, it only tells us a number.

How about a poll of university professors? Or scientists? Let's see what skilled thinkers believe.

 

[Nakosis]

from: Overwhelming majority of Americans think Biden is too old for another term: POLL.
"According to the poll, conducted using Ipsos' Knowledge Panel, 86% of Americans think Biden, 81, is too old to serve another term as president. That figure includes 59% of Americans who think both he and former President Donald Trump, the Republican front-runner, are too old and 27% who think only Biden is too old."

So given the above who are the Democrats going to replace him with? Or are they still going to let him run and lose?

I don't understand America's infatuation with old White men.

Yeah experience is great but I think we ought to balance experience with vitality and cognitive ability.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

You do understand that not all humans age the same, yes? Some decline faster than others, yes? Some die in their 70's while others can live into their 90's and even to 100, yes? If so, then we can't use averages and norms as judgment to any specific person and have a sound conclusion, agreed?

Based on what data and observations? I ask because I see a guy who is doing the job, and making sound decisions and prudent actions. I hear democrats and republicans say that Biden is lucid and well informed in meetings.

Have you met with Biden yourself? If not, should I trust your limited judgment over those who actually do meet with Biden?

Of course I have not met Biden or trump nor do I wish to do so.
But like the AMERICAN voters I make up my mind from what I have seen, and read and the decisions and results of their presidencies.
Of the two I prefer Biden.

However my position is there must be many more possible candidates in the prime of their lives who could do a better job and with more energy.
And who are more in tune with the modern world and now it works, and have a greater investment in its future.
Old people are from a generation that has had its turn, and are the ones who have created the present mess.
It should now be handed over to a much younger generation to create a brighter future for every one.
Madness is to keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

 

[metis]

How about a poll of university professors? Or scientists? Let's see what skilled thinkers believe.

I don't have an updated source, but "Scientific American" had the results of a study that showed roughly 90% of those with ph.d.'s voted for Dems over Pubs but there was a large independent's block, but I can't remember the percent. In the recent NYC election, college educated went strongly Dem.

 

[metis]

I don't understand America's infatuation with old White men.

Yeah experience is great but I think we ought to balance experience with vitality and cognitive ability.

I agree with you, but how to do the latter is quite challenging to say the least and probably would be unconstitutional unless we did it with all the age categories.

 

[F1fan]

Of course I have not met Biden or trump nor do I wish to do so.
But like the AMERICAN voters I make up my mind from what I have seen, and read and the decisions and results of their presidencies.
Of the two I prefer Biden.

That is the only sane and rational option.

However my position is there must be many more possible candidates in the prime of their lives who could do a better job and with more energy.

There are, but politics has changed over the last few decades, and the availability of disinformation has revealed how many citizens are poorly informed about anything. I have seen many viable candidates get obliterated by disinformation and gossip. Years ago Jon Huntsman was running for the republican nomination and he was one of the few that accepted evolution among the others. To my mind he was the most fit, but conservatives rejected him first.

Many democrats don't like Biden, and I think they are being influenced by the toxic criticism that is mostly propaganda. His age is the biggest problem, and many citizens don't read about how the economy is really doing.

To push back a bit, a candidate that is in the prime of life doesn't imply good judgment or experience. This is the president, not a quarterback. Biden has been exceptional in part to his long experience in federal government and 8 years as vice prez. The nation is at a pivotable time in history and wee need the experience. Trump is the last person we need in the White Houe, talk about pouring gasoline on a flame.

There are many other politicians I would trust for president. I think Romney would be OK. Liz Cheney would be trustworthy and work with democrats to restore balance and funstinality. Newsome would be good. I think if Biden is re-elected and dies in office that Harris will do an excellent job. Frankly the options are there, but the voters are very fickle and idealistic. Everyone is special and wants their way or no way. A nation of complainers is what we have, and nothing is ever good enough.

And who are more in tune with the modern world and now it works, and have a greater investment in its future.

Democrats are in tune. It's not like the whole democrat party is 80 years old. Biden has advisors, and they advise. Biden has evolved over the years to be more liberal, so I would not worry about him as president.

Old people are from a generation that has had its turn, and are the ones who have created the present mess.

What? You say this as if the elderly are no longer citizens with rights. I could counter this by saying the young are not experienced enough, so go sit in the back until you grow up and learn a few things.

It should now be handed over to a much younger generation to create a brighter future for every one.

As if only the young can agree with what is important to their generation. You have a healthy prejudice going on, and I suggest you represent the very bias you oppose. See how you have something to learn? Why should the elderly trust your attitude? Can the elderly trust that your generation won't round them up and turn them into Soylent Green? (If you are too young for that reference, look it up)

Madness is to keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

Like bias and intolerance?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't have an updated source, but "Scientific American" had the results of a study that showed roughly 90% of those with ph.d.'s voted for Dems over Pubs but there was a large independent's block, but I can't remember the percent. In the recent NYC election, college educated went strongly Dem.

And the polls had that as a close race. And weren't the polls leaning Republican for the last midterms? Trump can fool his MAGA base rather easily. He does not do so well with independent voters. They know who killed the border deal and why.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I remember when Ruth Bader Ginsburg refused to step down during Obama's presidency, and some people accused her critics of ageism too. The result of her refusal was that her irresponsibly stubborn decision partly contributed to Trump's packing of the court, with ramifications that may well extend for decades to come unless Roe v. Wade is somehow reinstated or a similar ruling replaces it.

The difference between a Supreme Court justice and a president, though, is that the death of a president doesn't create an immediate vacuum that needs to be filled by a (potentially politically motivated) appointment process. Presidents also have a fixed term.

Succession for the presidency is clearly spelled out. At election time, we know exactly who would take over if the president passed away or were unable to fulfill their duties.

If a candidate has an especially high likelihood of dying before the end of their term, voters can put as much weight as they want on their judgment of the vice presidential candidate.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't understand America's infatuation with old White men.

Yeah experience is great but I think we ought to balance experience with vitality and cognitive ability.

I don't think it's so much an obsession with old white men as it is an obsession within the party about fundraising ability.

... and it just happens that it's old white men who tend to be in the positions of influence to pull in those donors.

 

[GardenLady]

After 38 years in survey research, response and non-response analysis, and the effects of cell phone penetration on response, (now retired), I say this: A three-day or four-day landline survey is crap. It excludes people/households who are cell-only, most people with caller ID who don’t answer alls from people they don’t know, and those who don’t happen to be available when called during a short time period. Even those polls that also include cell phones are suspect—some rarely answer their cell and most don’t answer calls from those they don’t know.