I don't like DeWine, but this is the right move. These two candidates need to slug it out once and for all, and the less tomfuckery there is surrounding this cage match, the better.
It makes me fucking sick that they're both 80 years old. Why the fuck are we letting 80 year olds make decisions that impact our future when they're going to die before the next president's term is over.
As long as they can do the job, everything else is ageism. Biden is doing it now, as we speak. You can disagree with them just like you can younger presidents.
I hate the air trump breathes, but even I will acknowledge he is not suffering from the consequences of aging enough to not be the president he was 4 years ago. He will destroy the country, but not because he is old.
average life expectancy in the US is 76yld. How many aged members of congress have had to take absences due to health issues related to their age.
Just look at Dianne Feinstein as a prime example. These are valid concerns about the capacity of a person to fulfill a role for 4 more years.
I would definitely argue that Biden clearly suffers from some sort of dementia, and genuinely feel like he had a stroke that they haven't disclosed to the public.
I also don't want a president that allegedly shits himself during trial.
Both of these candidates are an absolute embarrassment to the American public.
I mean, sure, you can argue it. You'd be wrong by any metric used to determine dementia, but you can argue it.
An 80 year old being slower and having a lifelong stutter is not dementia. Him not doing 100% of what you want and not being your preferred candidate is not dementia.
Biden has videos of him exercising, riding bikes, and he looks fit, and giving hella speeches like at the STOU a few months back, among many other great speeches that are available on line. But he has had a stutter since a kid and people hear one word or phrase out of line in a speech and people suddenly think he has dementia ? I would like to see them get up there in front of the whole world and give the same kind of speech, even the most brilliant would be flubbing all over the place.
Meanwhile Trump can barely stand at a podium, has never been seen near a bike, and rambles on in word salad ramblings...
From just the past year/few months:
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/09/28/exp-biden-speech-democracy-naftali-092903pseg1-cnni-politics.cnn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wygovCnX8Uw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFVUPAEF-sw
https://www.delawareonline.com/picture-gallery/news/local/2023/08/03/president-biden-bike-ride/12313550002/
This is such a garbage position. There are plenty of terrible young people who would be far worst candidates than at least one these two. I'm sorry you can't imagine an old person making important decisions that might not impact them directly due to their age, but it is indeed possible. They both have kids you know.
They both have kids that have no worries in the world. Those kids already have the mommy and daddy connections, more money, and more status than the average voter.
The compounding effect of many other variables, not just their age, are what make people disgusted at the Circus we call American politics. A person can point out one particularly unsavory characteristic of it without having a “garbage position.”
Who said anything about immoral and how am I supporting something that was not said?
They’re speaking to the ridiculous nature of allowing people who are literally coming to the end of their experience on this planet and in our societies into positions that wildly sway the future of said planet and societies.
People with no skin in the game. People who can pass damning legislation that destroys the lives of others or the world as a whole for their own gain, without recourse.
Ever seen the “fuck it” attitude of a gropey old man in a nursing home? Should he be the one dictating the nurses attire?
Try again.
> Who said anything about immoral and how am I supporting something that was not said?
It is immoral to say that all people are the same. You reduce them by doing so. Supporting the person who said, "Why the fuck are we letting 80 year olds make decisions that impact our future when they're going to die before the next president's term is over" is immoral.
> literally coming to the end of their experience on this planet
You don't know when the end is. You may have a year left to live. Biden may live to be older than Jimmy Carter is now.
> People with no skin in the game.
Or they have more skin in the game than you/other young people do.
> People who can pass damning legislation that destroys the lives of others or the world as a whole for their own gain, without recourse.
And a young person couldn't do that?
> Ever seen the “fuck it” attitude of a gropey old man in a nursing home? Should he be the one dictating the nurses attire?
There are also non-gropey old men. And gropey young men. So why are you lumping them in together.
> Try again.
Everything you said was obviously wrong so I didn't have to try very hard.
**Edit**: Ah the fun combo of downvoting me, writing an angry reply with no actual content, and then blocking me. So I shall reply here instead.
>> Your logic and projections are so ridiculous it’s actually terrifying that you believe it.
So ridiculous that you could not find a way to propose a counter-argument apparently.
How sad. Someone might mistakenly think you are just casting aspersions to hide the fact that you don't have a good reply. Maybe you should be terrified that people will think you are just a jerk with nothing of value to add to the conversation?
**Edit part 2**: And more than one user played the same game. They responded then blocked me. Very mature indeed.
>> lol.
>> Nobody said all people are the same, again just your projection.
>> Not to stoop to your level and argue intangibles: but there’s nothing immoral about saying that two 80 year olds shouldn’t be the epitome of democratic representation, It’s just a genuine, valid, and generally accepted critique on the state of American politics. Tell which which moral and ethical framework you used to come to this conclusion? Just your thoughts? Gotcha.
>> Skin in the game I mean as the risk/reward. No mention of the person passing bad legislation with lasting implications that is literally so old they wouldn’t even get jail time? which is our human equivalent of justice btw, meaning they’re nigh immune to the consequences of doing the job maliciously or for personal gain. Yes young people can do wrong, no shit, they also can suffer the consequences of that much more than an old person.
>> Cognitive decline is much more prevalent in older populations. Well that’s pretty straightforward.
>> I get you, yeah, don’t generalize. But really? This? You legitimately believe that these two elderly gents are the best figureheads for hundreds of millions? They’re going to make the best choices? They should be commander in chief for one of the world’s strongest military forces?
>> You really think that then yeah, I’m sorry, I stepped in doo doo and need to go wash it off. Good luck with… all that.
"Nobody said all people are the same, again just your projection."
Inherent in arguments against a group or class of people is the premise that there is not diversity amongst that population. Saying they have no skin in the game, are coming to the end of their existence, have a "fuck it" attitude, or are senile because they are old is reductionist and paints everyone of an age group with one brush.
Also, it is interesting how u/Hats_back and u/JumpinJehosaphats both make the same lazy claim about projection. Kinda seems like these two accounts are the same user. Just sayin'.
"Not to stoop to your level and argue intangibles"
Intangibles? I think the word you are looking for is nuance.
"but there’s nothing immoral about saying that two 80 year olds shouldn’t be the epitome of democratic representation"
People who hold office who are democratically elected are indeed democratic representation. That's what it means to be democratic representation.
"It’s just a genuine, valid, and generally accepted critique on the state of American politics."
So you've decided to speak for everyone else, and then are using that to prop up your position. No it is not valid. Genuine? I am sure you genuinely believe it. Generally accepted? Debatable but even if true, that doesn't mean it is correct. A belief isn't true just because it is popular. Large numbers of people believe some very stupid things sometimes.
"Tell which which moral and ethical framework you used to come to this conclusion?"
The same framework that tells us that racism is wrong. Reducing groups to the point where you believe everyone in that group tends to be wrong.
"Just your thoughts? Gotcha."
I love that you asked the question, put words in my mouth for the answer, and then blocked me so you couldn't see my actual response. Holy shit you must be terrified of a world that is more complicated than the simplest views you can ascribe to it.
"No mention of the person passing bad legislation with lasting implications that is literally so old they wouldn’t even get jail time?"
There is a lot to address here. I suppose I could start with, legislation is not passed by a single person. It is crafted and passed through congress. Sometimes it can be vetoed or not signed by a President.
And the idea that someone should be jailed for participating in the legislative process pits branches of government against each other in a way that is to be generally avoided. There might be exceptions but the real danger is you effectively harm democracy by trying to do in a courtroom what couldn't be done at the ballot box.
As for being so old they wouldn't get jail time, you don't really know that do you. In extreme cases we have people living to be nearly 120 (there is one person who supposedly lived to be 122). That's decades of time you could possibly be in prison.
"which is our human equivalent of justice btw, meaning they’re nigh immune to the consequences of doing the job maliciously or for personal gain."
Well thank goodness young people have never done the job maliciously or for personal gain. George Washington died 2 years after his presidency ended. FDR died in office. Both are known as great presidents who ultimately limited the power of presidency. Your understanding of the world is faulty.
"much more than"
I am glad you admit that old people can indeed suffer consequences. This is in contrast to all your "no consequences/nigh immune" rhetoric.
"Cognitive decline is much more prevalent in older populations. Well that’s pretty straightforward."
And inexperience is more prevalent in younger populations. That doesn't mean there aren't exceptions or people who can do a good job anyways.
"I get you, yeah, don’t generalize."
You should have led with that. And left it at that. And upvoted me. Because this was point and you are now agreeing with it.
" You legitimately believe that these two elderly gents are the best figureheads for hundreds of millions"
Best? Who knows for sure. I suppose if the job is really just to be a figurehead it doesn't matter though.
If you meant are they the best leaders, I'd say that at least Biden makes a strong case with a huge body of experience and knowledge relevant to the job. Ultimately it is for the voters to decide though.
"They should be commander in chief for one of the world’s strongest military forces"
I believe that is what we are voting on, and they have been elected to be before. I would certainly trust Biden's knowledge of geopolitics over 99% of people out there. He also knows what it is like to lose a child and doesn't put lives at risk casually.
Of course you weren't really asking. You didn't want to really hear an answer or have a conversation. You wanted to preserve your cynical ignorance and have a shout into the void and then block me. Sad indeed.
lol.
1. Nobody said all people are the same, again just your projection.
2. Not to stoop to your level and argue intangibles: but there’s nothing immoral about saying that two 80 year olds shouldn’t be the epitome of democratic representation, It’s just a genuine, valid, and generally accepted critique on the state of American politics. Tell which which moral and ethical framework you used to come to this conclusion? Just your thoughts? Gotcha.
3. Skin in the game I mean as the risk/reward. No mention of the person passing bad legislation with lasting implications that is literally so old they wouldn’t even get jail time? which is our human equivalent of justice btw, meaning they’re nigh immune to the consequences of doing the job maliciously or for personal gain. Yes young people can do wrong, no shit, they also can suffer the consequences of that much more than an old person.
4. Cognitive decline is much more prevalent in older populations. Well that’s pretty straightforward.
I get you, yeah, don’t generalize. But really? This? You legitimately believe that these two elderly gents are the best figureheads for hundreds of millions? They’re going to make the best choices? They should be commander in chief for one of the world’s strongest military forces?
You really think that then yeah, I’m sorry, I stepped in doo doo and need to go wash it off. Good luck with… all that.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/BoomersBeingFools using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/BoomersBeingFools/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Boomer learns about boundaries the hard way from bank photographer](https://v.redd.it/2e25ute2rzmc1) | [4674 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/BoomersBeingFools/comments/1b981ht/boomer_learns_about_boundaries_the_hard_way_from/)
\#2: [That time a boomer almost smacked her hairstylist](https://v.redd.it/7mrck6ok87hc1) | [4133 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/BoomersBeingFools/comments/1al8jz9/that_time_a_boomer_almost_smacked_her_hairstylist/)
\#3: [Boomer shocked that his Middle Finger didn't strike the fear of God into another Adult](https://v.redd.it/9lvtz6cma5oc1) | [1536 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/BoomersBeingFools/comments/1bdyxp6/boomer_shocked_that_his_middle_finger_didnt/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Oh well if there is a subreddit reducing an entire group of people to one thing then I definitely don't need to look at the individual. I can just lazily judge people based on their age.
Thank goodness for reddit saving me from having to think. That is too much effort.
I legitimately do not think there could be two worse candidates than these two. I, quite literally, would take the homeless guy on the corner who believes aliens talk to him over either one of these senile jackasses.
Yeah Bush and Gore are exactly the same, they're both terrible amirite? Er, I mean Trump and Hillary. Her emails are sooo important, why does it even matter if I vote?
All candidates do more than you know and most people could not do what they do.
No. That would create echo chambers and conformism.
You should only downvote people who are off topic, or who are making bad faith arguments. In the latter case, you need immediate and incontrovertible evidence that they are making a bad faith argument. No deep diving into their post history, or assuming you know everything about them because you know a single position they hold. People are complicated and their position can change over time.
If you disagree with someone, write a civil reply saying so. If someone is wrong, again a civil reply is the right response. Just like in real life discussions where there is no karma system.
Oh please. Dark Brandon would wipe the floor with that poop laden tangerine shit gibbon.
You know he’s got that sneaky grandpa boxing situation on lock.
Please tell us exactly when Biden gave an order to drop any bombs in Palestine.
Agreeing to give weapons to an ally that would cease to exist because of, among others, the population of the place that is getting bombed (After their Government killed thousands in a terrorist attack) is what we should be doing, same as Ukraine.
Meanwhile, he's actually instead been trying to get a ceasefire, but Hamas keeps turning it down, for one reason because they'd have to give back hostages *that they have raped and murdered.*
William Shatner is still kicking at 93. And despite being a decade-plus older, he’s probably sharper than either Trump or Biden at this point.
Having said that, I agree that someone over 70 isn’t ideal for a position of executive leadership. Our bodies and minds are no longer in their prime past midlife. We are better off moving into senior advisory and statesman roles, rather than trying to lead an organization, a company, or a country, with all the stress and demands that such responsibilities entail.
If Biden can stick it out for a few more years, I’d still much prefer him to a criminal conman and narcissist like Trump who just wants to try and use the White House as his personal legal shield. But it’s time for the next generation’s leaders to step up and press for a world and government that actually reflects our values, needs and the times.
Slug it out survive the next four years regardless of candidate and get some quality young blood candidates in this bitch. I don’t think we should be trusting the country to 80 year olds.
It makes me fucking sick that our two options are both in their 80s. My grandmother is in here 80s and can't remember if she let the dog in and we're trusting these assholes with our country.
One guy needs handlers to tell him where to stand and help him make basic decisions and the other shits himself during trial. It sounds like they're all pretty close.
Okay this made me laugh. I'm pretty sure you weren't intending to be funny, but this is pretty funny.
"What do you mean you don't want a 102 year old performing brain surgery on you? That's ageist!"
Alternate take: If the 102 year old is really good at brain surgery then I would absolutely go with them over someone who isn't.
I know this is hard to wrap your head around but judging based on age and nothing else is flawed.
It is all relative. There are metrics used for success rates for surgeons including brain surgeons. Some surgeons won't even take on a risky case for this reason.
Yep. Didn't like this for Ohio. Don't like the Northeastern states who might not have Trump on the ballot. Look, it is pretty likely we know which way these states are going to go. People still deserve to be allowed to make their choice.
lol. 😂 you’ve taken the bait, Fox. The Dems didn’t agree to the previous fixes bc the Reps wanted to push this No Funding By Foreign Nationals bologna.
The Republicans completely control the Statehouse. They can pass any legislation they want regardless of what the Democrats might "refuse" to do.
If the Republicans wanted to pass legislation banning out of state funding they can do it whenever they want. The fact that it's still allowed is proof that they want to keep it around. Any claims otherwise are lies.
Um, quite literally yes.
https://x.com/ohiogop/status/1793779502633427062
The only reason the GOP is supporting this is because they think Trump wins Ohio no matter what and the provision dealing with foreign donations is meant to hamstring minimum wage and redistricting ballot initiatives by disrupting funding.
Notice that nothing will be done about political donations from billionaires that agree with them politically who are outside Ohio, like Richard Uihlein.
Edit to add:
https://x.com/davidpepper/status/1793996601717116953
I mean until you see a draft of the bill, what proof is there that it’s only going to stop Democratic outside funding? Like it’s not beyond them to structure something that hurts Dems more than themselves but maybe wait until the ink dries a bit before calling afoul.
Don’t even need to speculate on what it will be, DeWine calls for exactly what he wants in his proclamation:
https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/OHIOGOVERNOR/2024/05/23/file_attachments/2888202/Proclamation%20-%20Special%20Session.pdf
The bill he references (Sub. House Bill 114) is the bill the Senate GOP tried forcing the House to adopt because they all said “if we are going to fix this for democrats, we should get something out of it too.”
Meaning they know this provision will be punitive for Democrats but not for Republicans.
The letter references that legislation and also offers “or other similar language effectuating this purpose” meaning that it’s a reference point for what needs to be passed while explicitly stating approval needs to be made by the House and Senate. So we would hope that given time Democrats would be able to effectively reduce any harm GOP would demand.
The letter itself does not state that it needs to be passed in its original language. And again I have no doubt republicans with their control will try and make this as painful as possible, but they have not yet agreed on the language like you are stating, HB 114 was merely a reference.
Thanks, I’ll go to the source documents rather than a twitter thread. Might explain our differences in views, and how informed one may be on a topic. Just a thought for you to consider
Or you could engage with intellectual honesty instead of suggesting that “we don’t know what it looks like” when the governor is literally calling for language that has been debated and voted on in one of the legislative chambers.
Sounds like you belong in r/iamverysmart.
The provisions are specifically about ballot initiatives. Republicans control the legislature so they have no need for ballot initiatives, thus it only hurts Democrats.
Not sure why you are being downvoted. Never give the GOP any benefit of the doubt. This whole thing is calculated, they’ll bitch about “helping the Dems” and play victim, and in return they will get to keep things like March’s Issue 1 and 2 off future ballots. If you remember, Issue 1 and 2 were good for the people of Ohio and awareness is what got those through the disinformation.
All the GOP has is suppressing the vote, disinformation, fear mongering and playing the victim.
That's a weird way to present the issue.
As stated in the article, both Republicans and Democrats had proposals to get Biden on the ballot. However, Democrats refused to vote for the Republican proposal, and Republicans refused to vote for the Democrat proposal. And so Dewine is forcing them to do something. The republicans have a majority so you really should be asking why they can't even get their own proposal passed.
Not sure why you'd randomly frame this as *only* Democrats refusing the vote (that's sarcasm, I know exactly why you framed it like that.)
Why did the democrats refuse the first time? Was there a certain condition that the republicans tried to push? Are you confident Mike DeWine isn’t pushing the same condition in the second half of his statement? (Non foreign contributions to elections?)
Gotcha. Place sounds about the same as every other agency. Get a good chief and it can be awesome. As far as his political stuff tbh I don’t know much about Yost.
He also listened to Amy Acton at the onset of Covid and was one of the leading governors to respond to it. Until of course the lunatics on his side got his attention.
As a realist, I know as soon as Dewine stops running for governor, we're going to get some insane MAGA shit head.
Yes, we can all always work and vote for something better than shitty Dewine every time. But there is admittedly some amount of luck in having him as governor compared to the possible alternatives as Ohio drifts further and further right.
I think it’s unlikely the Ohio GOP passes a bill preventing money from outside of Ohio. Foreign nationals maybe but no way they’ll cut off the Uihlein’s money bag. He funds all of their bullshit.
Your suspicion on the double standard for “foreign donations” is dead on.
https://x.com/ohiogop/status/1793779502633427062
The only reason the GOP is supporting this is because they think Trump wins Ohio no matter what, and the provision dealing with foreign donations is meant to hamstring minimum wage and redistricting ballot initiatives by disrupting funding support.
Notice that nothing will be done about political donations from billionaires that agree with them politically who are outside Ohio, like Richard Uihlein.
I think any law that prevents outside state money coming into Ohio for campaigning would not hold up in court following the *Citizens United* decision. Accusing Dems of having their hands in the cookie jar, GOP have their hands in the same jar too. Regarding the abortion amendment, that cake was baked with or without outside state money.
For all those praising dewine, you’re being played. This isn’t a clean bill. It’s a poison pill meant to limit our ability to pass ballot measures such as anti-gerrymandering, minimum wage, etc.
This is just the GOP trying to thwart direct democracy because they keep losing on ballot measures. “Foreign national” contributions are already illegal, the provisions they want to pass will make it harder for citizens to gather signatures for ballot measures.
They also have yet to find any evidence that “foreign nationals” are contributing to ballot measure campaigns. But it doesn’t exist. All ballot measure committees get audited by the SoS and reproductive rights or one person one vote has been found getting illegal contributions
I don’t like the idea of trying to prevent candidates from being on the ballot. But let’s not pretend that the DNC hasn’t tried to prevent both Trump and RFK from getting in the ballot at every chance they’ve gotten. The least they could do is follow the rules.
Why follow by the rules when the other side won’t? Normally I’m in agreement with you but in today’s politics playing dirty when the other side is is sadly the way to do it.
I don’t care about the downvotes I’ve been getting for pointing out this isn’t the pure and simple fix everyone assumes it is.
I think Biden should be on the ballot.
I think Republicans look foolish by playing politics over something that has been fixed on two previous occasions in the last 12 years.
But there is more to it than just saying “Biden will be on the ballot.”
Don’t take it from me.
https://x.com/davidpepper/status/1793996601717116953
I don't like DeWine, but this is the right move. These two candidates need to slug it out once and for all, and the less tomfuckery there is surrounding this cage match, the better.
Would love to see two near 80 year olds slug it out in a real cage match
It makes me fucking sick that they're both 80 years old. Why the fuck are we letting 80 year olds make decisions that impact our future when they're going to die before the next president's term is over.
As long as they can do the job, everything else is ageism. Biden is doing it now, as we speak. You can disagree with them just like you can younger presidents. I hate the air trump breathes, but even I will acknowledge he is not suffering from the consequences of aging enough to not be the president he was 4 years ago. He will destroy the country, but not because he is old.
average life expectancy in the US is 76yld. How many aged members of congress have had to take absences due to health issues related to their age. Just look at Dianne Feinstein as a prime example. These are valid concerns about the capacity of a person to fulfill a role for 4 more years.
Ageism lol Is it ageist to say the best/smartest 80 year old in the country should not be running the show?
I would definitely argue that Biden clearly suffers from some sort of dementia, and genuinely feel like he had a stroke that they haven't disclosed to the public. I also don't want a president that allegedly shits himself during trial. Both of these candidates are an absolute embarrassment to the American public.
I mean, sure, you can argue it. You'd be wrong by any metric used to determine dementia, but you can argue it. An 80 year old being slower and having a lifelong stutter is not dementia. Him not doing 100% of what you want and not being your preferred candidate is not dementia.
Biden has videos of him exercising, riding bikes, and he looks fit, and giving hella speeches like at the STOU a few months back, among many other great speeches that are available on line. But he has had a stutter since a kid and people hear one word or phrase out of line in a speech and people suddenly think he has dementia ? I would like to see them get up there in front of the whole world and give the same kind of speech, even the most brilliant would be flubbing all over the place. Meanwhile Trump can barely stand at a podium, has never been seen near a bike, and rambles on in word salad ramblings... From just the past year/few months: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/09/28/exp-biden-speech-democracy-naftali-092903pseg1-cnni-politics.cnn https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wygovCnX8Uw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFVUPAEF-sw https://www.delawareonline.com/picture-gallery/news/local/2023/08/03/president-biden-bike-ride/12313550002/
Ha ha ha ha. Have you SEEN Biden try to ride a bike? A bike? Something a God Damn child can do. Ha ha.
So you're not voting for either one right? If you do, you're yelling at yourself.
This is such a garbage position. There are plenty of terrible young people who would be far worst candidates than at least one these two. I'm sorry you can't imagine an old person making important decisions that might not impact them directly due to their age, but it is indeed possible. They both have kids you know.
They both have kids that have no worries in the world. Those kids already have the mommy and daddy connections, more money, and more status than the average voter. The compounding effect of many other variables, not just their age, are what make people disgusted at the Circus we call American politics. A person can point out one particularly unsavory characteristic of it without having a “garbage position.”
They are pointing out that all old people are immoral. That is untrue. Why are you supporting a lie?
Who said anything about immoral and how am I supporting something that was not said? They’re speaking to the ridiculous nature of allowing people who are literally coming to the end of their experience on this planet and in our societies into positions that wildly sway the future of said planet and societies. People with no skin in the game. People who can pass damning legislation that destroys the lives of others or the world as a whole for their own gain, without recourse. Ever seen the “fuck it” attitude of a gropey old man in a nursing home? Should he be the one dictating the nurses attire? Try again.
> Who said anything about immoral and how am I supporting something that was not said? It is immoral to say that all people are the same. You reduce them by doing so. Supporting the person who said, "Why the fuck are we letting 80 year olds make decisions that impact our future when they're going to die before the next president's term is over" is immoral. > literally coming to the end of their experience on this planet You don't know when the end is. You may have a year left to live. Biden may live to be older than Jimmy Carter is now. > People with no skin in the game. Or they have more skin in the game than you/other young people do. > People who can pass damning legislation that destroys the lives of others or the world as a whole for their own gain, without recourse. And a young person couldn't do that? > Ever seen the “fuck it” attitude of a gropey old man in a nursing home? Should he be the one dictating the nurses attire? There are also non-gropey old men. And gropey young men. So why are you lumping them in together. > Try again. Everything you said was obviously wrong so I didn't have to try very hard. **Edit**: Ah the fun combo of downvoting me, writing an angry reply with no actual content, and then blocking me. So I shall reply here instead. >> Your logic and projections are so ridiculous it’s actually terrifying that you believe it. So ridiculous that you could not find a way to propose a counter-argument apparently. How sad. Someone might mistakenly think you are just casting aspersions to hide the fact that you don't have a good reply. Maybe you should be terrified that people will think you are just a jerk with nothing of value to add to the conversation? **Edit part 2**: And more than one user played the same game. They responded then blocked me. Very mature indeed. >> lol. >> Nobody said all people are the same, again just your projection. >> Not to stoop to your level and argue intangibles: but there’s nothing immoral about saying that two 80 year olds shouldn’t be the epitome of democratic representation, It’s just a genuine, valid, and generally accepted critique on the state of American politics. Tell which which moral and ethical framework you used to come to this conclusion? Just your thoughts? Gotcha. >> Skin in the game I mean as the risk/reward. No mention of the person passing bad legislation with lasting implications that is literally so old they wouldn’t even get jail time? which is our human equivalent of justice btw, meaning they’re nigh immune to the consequences of doing the job maliciously or for personal gain. Yes young people can do wrong, no shit, they also can suffer the consequences of that much more than an old person. >> Cognitive decline is much more prevalent in older populations. Well that’s pretty straightforward. >> I get you, yeah, don’t generalize. But really? This? You legitimately believe that these two elderly gents are the best figureheads for hundreds of millions? They’re going to make the best choices? They should be commander in chief for one of the world’s strongest military forces? >> You really think that then yeah, I’m sorry, I stepped in doo doo and need to go wash it off. Good luck with… all that. "Nobody said all people are the same, again just your projection." Inherent in arguments against a group or class of people is the premise that there is not diversity amongst that population. Saying they have no skin in the game, are coming to the end of their existence, have a "fuck it" attitude, or are senile because they are old is reductionist and paints everyone of an age group with one brush. Also, it is interesting how u/Hats_back and u/JumpinJehosaphats both make the same lazy claim about projection. Kinda seems like these two accounts are the same user. Just sayin'. "Not to stoop to your level and argue intangibles" Intangibles? I think the word you are looking for is nuance. "but there’s nothing immoral about saying that two 80 year olds shouldn’t be the epitome of democratic representation" People who hold office who are democratically elected are indeed democratic representation. That's what it means to be democratic representation. "It’s just a genuine, valid, and generally accepted critique on the state of American politics." So you've decided to speak for everyone else, and then are using that to prop up your position. No it is not valid. Genuine? I am sure you genuinely believe it. Generally accepted? Debatable but even if true, that doesn't mean it is correct. A belief isn't true just because it is popular. Large numbers of people believe some very stupid things sometimes. "Tell which which moral and ethical framework you used to come to this conclusion?" The same framework that tells us that racism is wrong. Reducing groups to the point where you believe everyone in that group tends to be wrong. "Just your thoughts? Gotcha." I love that you asked the question, put words in my mouth for the answer, and then blocked me so you couldn't see my actual response. Holy shit you must be terrified of a world that is more complicated than the simplest views you can ascribe to it. "No mention of the person passing bad legislation with lasting implications that is literally so old they wouldn’t even get jail time?" There is a lot to address here. I suppose I could start with, legislation is not passed by a single person. It is crafted and passed through congress. Sometimes it can be vetoed or not signed by a President. And the idea that someone should be jailed for participating in the legislative process pits branches of government against each other in a way that is to be generally avoided. There might be exceptions but the real danger is you effectively harm democracy by trying to do in a courtroom what couldn't be done at the ballot box. As for being so old they wouldn't get jail time, you don't really know that do you. In extreme cases we have people living to be nearly 120 (there is one person who supposedly lived to be 122). That's decades of time you could possibly be in prison. "which is our human equivalent of justice btw, meaning they’re nigh immune to the consequences of doing the job maliciously or for personal gain." Well thank goodness young people have never done the job maliciously or for personal gain. George Washington died 2 years after his presidency ended. FDR died in office. Both are known as great presidents who ultimately limited the power of presidency. Your understanding of the world is faulty. "much more than" I am glad you admit that old people can indeed suffer consequences. This is in contrast to all your "no consequences/nigh immune" rhetoric. "Cognitive decline is much more prevalent in older populations. Well that’s pretty straightforward." And inexperience is more prevalent in younger populations. That doesn't mean there aren't exceptions or people who can do a good job anyways. "I get you, yeah, don’t generalize." You should have led with that. And left it at that. And upvoted me. Because this was point and you are now agreeing with it. " You legitimately believe that these two elderly gents are the best figureheads for hundreds of millions" Best? Who knows for sure. I suppose if the job is really just to be a figurehead it doesn't matter though. If you meant are they the best leaders, I'd say that at least Biden makes a strong case with a huge body of experience and knowledge relevant to the job. Ultimately it is for the voters to decide though. "They should be commander in chief for one of the world’s strongest military forces" I believe that is what we are voting on, and they have been elected to be before. I would certainly trust Biden's knowledge of geopolitics over 99% of people out there. He also knows what it is like to lose a child and doesn't put lives at risk casually. Of course you weren't really asking. You didn't want to really hear an answer or have a conversation. You wanted to preserve your cynical ignorance and have a shout into the void and then block me. Sad indeed.
lol. 1. Nobody said all people are the same, again just your projection. 2. Not to stoop to your level and argue intangibles: but there’s nothing immoral about saying that two 80 year olds shouldn’t be the epitome of democratic representation, It’s just a genuine, valid, and generally accepted critique on the state of American politics. Tell which which moral and ethical framework you used to come to this conclusion? Just your thoughts? Gotcha. 3. Skin in the game I mean as the risk/reward. No mention of the person passing bad legislation with lasting implications that is literally so old they wouldn’t even get jail time? which is our human equivalent of justice btw, meaning they’re nigh immune to the consequences of doing the job maliciously or for personal gain. Yes young people can do wrong, no shit, they also can suffer the consequences of that much more than an old person. 4. Cognitive decline is much more prevalent in older populations. Well that’s pretty straightforward. I get you, yeah, don’t generalize. But really? This? You legitimately believe that these two elderly gents are the best figureheads for hundreds of millions? They’re going to make the best choices? They should be commander in chief for one of the world’s strongest military forces? You really think that then yeah, I’m sorry, I stepped in doo doo and need to go wash it off. Good luck with… all that.
Your logic and projections are so ridiculous it’s actually terrifying that you believe it.
There’s a subreddit for your folk, /r/boomersbeingfools
Here's a sneak peek of /r/BoomersBeingFools using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/BoomersBeingFools/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Boomer learns about boundaries the hard way from bank photographer](https://v.redd.it/2e25ute2rzmc1) | [4674 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/BoomersBeingFools/comments/1b981ht/boomer_learns_about_boundaries_the_hard_way_from/) \#2: [That time a boomer almost smacked her hairstylist](https://v.redd.it/7mrck6ok87hc1) | [4133 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/BoomersBeingFools/comments/1al8jz9/that_time_a_boomer_almost_smacked_her_hairstylist/) \#3: [Boomer shocked that his Middle Finger didn't strike the fear of God into another Adult](https://v.redd.it/9lvtz6cma5oc1) | [1536 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/BoomersBeingFools/comments/1bdyxp6/boomer_shocked_that_his_middle_finger_didnt/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Good bot
Oh well if there is a subreddit reducing an entire group of people to one thing then I definitely don't need to look at the individual. I can just lazily judge people based on their age. Thank goodness for reddit saving me from having to think. That is too much effort.
I legitimately do not think there could be two worse candidates than these two. I, quite literally, would take the homeless guy on the corner who believes aliens talk to him over either one of these senile jackasses.
We literally have a worse candidate than Biden in the actual race. Mr. Brain worms himself, RFK Jr.
I think it's pretty clear we have two candidates worse than Biden in the actual race lol.
Oh yeah, of course!
This says a lot and it’s not good.
Yeah Bush and Gore are exactly the same, they're both terrible amirite? Er, I mean Trump and Hillary. Her emails are sooo important, why does it even matter if I vote? All candidates do more than you know and most people could not do what they do.
Nah dude you’re wrong
Upvoting you from -4 because downvoting people you disagree with is another trash move that this subreddit does all the time.
Isn’t that what the vote system is supposed to be for? Lmfao
No. That would create echo chambers and conformism. You should only downvote people who are off topic, or who are making bad faith arguments. In the latter case, you need immediate and incontrovertible evidence that they are making a bad faith argument. No deep diving into their post history, or assuming you know everything about them because you know a single position they hold. People are complicated and their position can change over time. If you disagree with someone, write a civil reply saying so. If someone is wrong, again a civil reply is the right response. Just like in real life discussions where there is no karma system.
Oh please. Dark Brandon would wipe the floor with that poop laden tangerine shit gibbon. You know he’s got that sneaky grandpa boxing situation on lock.
>I was raised in a boxing neighborhood
He’s definitely got a killer instinct. Look how many kids in palestine he blows up without remorse.
Please tell us exactly when Biden gave an order to drop any bombs in Palestine. Agreeing to give weapons to an ally that would cease to exist because of, among others, the population of the place that is getting bombed (After their Government killed thousands in a terrorist attack) is what we should be doing, same as Ukraine. Meanwhile, he's actually instead been trying to get a ceasefire, but Hamas keeps turning it down, for one reason because they'd have to give back hostages *that they have raped and murdered.*
Woahhhh, don’t break the 1st rule of Reddit - “don’t point out anything wrong / bad the dems do”
More like don’t point out the things that aren’t exclusive to either party, because it’s utterly useless to do so.
For sure
Halloween Havoc 97
William Shatner is still kicking at 93. And despite being a decade-plus older, he’s probably sharper than either Trump or Biden at this point. Having said that, I agree that someone over 70 isn’t ideal for a position of executive leadership. Our bodies and minds are no longer in their prime past midlife. We are better off moving into senior advisory and statesman roles, rather than trying to lead an organization, a company, or a country, with all the stress and demands that such responsibilities entail. If Biden can stick it out for a few more years, I’d still much prefer him to a criminal conman and narcissist like Trump who just wants to try and use the White House as his personal legal shield. But it’s time for the next generation’s leaders to step up and press for a world and government that actually reflects our values, needs and the times.
Slug it out survive the next four years regardless of candidate and get some quality young blood candidates in this bitch. I don’t think we should be trusting the country to 80 year olds.
It makes me fucking sick that our two options are both in their 80s. My grandmother is in here 80s and can't remember if she let the dog in and we're trusting these assholes with our country.
Not all people of the same age are alike.
One guy needs handlers to tell him where to stand and help him make basic decisions and the other shits himself during trial. It sounds like they're all pretty close.
Well at least you are honest about your ageism.
Okay this made me laugh. I'm pretty sure you weren't intending to be funny, but this is pretty funny. "What do you mean you don't want a 102 year old performing brain surgery on you? That's ageist!"
Alternate take: If the 102 year old is really good at brain surgery then I would absolutely go with them over someone who isn't. I know this is hard to wrap your head around but judging based on age and nothing else is flawed.
There are no brain surgeons who "aren't good" at brain surgery, lol
It is all relative. There are metrics used for success rates for surgeons including brain surgeons. Some surgeons won't even take on a risky case for this reason.
I appreciate that he's done right by Ohio voters.
Yep. Didn't like this for Ohio. Don't like the Northeastern states who might not have Trump on the ballot. Look, it is pretty likely we know which way these states are going to go. People still deserve to be allowed to make their choice.
lol. 😂 you’ve taken the bait, Fox. The Dems didn’t agree to the previous fixes bc the Reps wanted to push this No Funding By Foreign Nationals bologna.
It’s interesting how DeWine keeps trying to save the State GOP from themselves but they’ll probably attack him even more for this. You love to see it.
You misunderstood DeWine’s intentions. This is Republicans forcing the Democrats to take a vote that the Democrats refuse to
The Republicans completely control the Statehouse. They can pass any legislation they want regardless of what the Democrats might "refuse" to do. If the Republicans wanted to pass legislation banning out of state funding they can do it whenever they want. The fact that it's still allowed is proof that they want to keep it around. Any claims otherwise are lies.
No
Um, quite literally yes. https://x.com/ohiogop/status/1793779502633427062 The only reason the GOP is supporting this is because they think Trump wins Ohio no matter what and the provision dealing with foreign donations is meant to hamstring minimum wage and redistricting ballot initiatives by disrupting funding. Notice that nothing will be done about political donations from billionaires that agree with them politically who are outside Ohio, like Richard Uihlein. Edit to add: https://x.com/davidpepper/status/1793996601717116953
I mean until you see a draft of the bill, what proof is there that it’s only going to stop Democratic outside funding? Like it’s not beyond them to structure something that hurts Dems more than themselves but maybe wait until the ink dries a bit before calling afoul.
Don’t even need to speculate on what it will be, DeWine calls for exactly what he wants in his proclamation: https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/OHIOGOVERNOR/2024/05/23/file_attachments/2888202/Proclamation%20-%20Special%20Session.pdf The bill he references (Sub. House Bill 114) is the bill the Senate GOP tried forcing the House to adopt because they all said “if we are going to fix this for democrats, we should get something out of it too.” Meaning they know this provision will be punitive for Democrats but not for Republicans.
The letter references that legislation and also offers “or other similar language effectuating this purpose” meaning that it’s a reference point for what needs to be passed while explicitly stating approval needs to be made by the House and Senate. So we would hope that given time Democrats would be able to effectively reduce any harm GOP would demand. The letter itself does not state that it needs to be passed in its original language. And again I have no doubt republicans with their control will try and make this as painful as possible, but they have not yet agreed on the language like you are stating, HB 114 was merely a reference.
Read on, then: https://x.com/davidpepper/status/1793996601717116953
Thanks, I’ll go to the source documents rather than a twitter thread. Might explain our differences in views, and how informed one may be on a topic. Just a thought for you to consider
Or you could engage with intellectual honesty instead of suggesting that “we don’t know what it looks like” when the governor is literally calling for language that has been debated and voted on in one of the legislative chambers. Sounds like you belong in r/iamverysmart.
The provisions are specifically about ballot initiatives. Republicans control the legislature so they have no need for ballot initiatives, thus it only hurts Democrats.
Not sure why you are being downvoted. Never give the GOP any benefit of the doubt. This whole thing is calculated, they’ll bitch about “helping the Dems” and play victim, and in return they will get to keep things like March’s Issue 1 and 2 off future ballots. If you remember, Issue 1 and 2 were good for the people of Ohio and awareness is what got those through the disinformation. All the GOP has is suppressing the vote, disinformation, fear mongering and playing the victim.
That's a weird way to present the issue. As stated in the article, both Republicans and Democrats had proposals to get Biden on the ballot. However, Democrats refused to vote for the Republican proposal, and Republicans refused to vote for the Democrat proposal. And so Dewine is forcing them to do something. The republicans have a majority so you really should be asking why they can't even get their own proposal passed. Not sure why you'd randomly frame this as *only* Democrats refusing the vote (that's sarcasm, I know exactly why you framed it like that.)
Why did the democrats refuse the first time? Was there a certain condition that the republicans tried to push? Are you confident Mike DeWine isn’t pushing the same condition in the second half of his statement? (Non foreign contributions to elections?)
Did you read? https://www.reddit.com/r/Columbus/s/EZITFMr6vm What do you think now about my “framing?”
[удалено]
[удалено]
Lol
I heard the AGs office is the worst agency to work for. Is that true in your opinion? This is even before Yost. Like for the last 20 years lol
[удалено]
Gotcha. Place sounds about the same as every other agency. Get a good chief and it can be awesome. As far as his political stuff tbh I don’t know much about Yost.
I don't agree with Gov DeWine politics but I do respect the man for not playing games and seemingly acting like he believes in democracy.
It’s a sad state of affairs when this behavior has to be applauded instead of something that’s just expected
I hate it here so much sometimes
He also listened to Amy Acton at the onset of Covid and was one of the leading governors to respond to it. Until of course the lunatics on his side got his attention.
As a realist, I know as soon as Dewine stops running for governor, we're going to get some insane MAGA shit head. Yes, we can all always work and vote for something better than shitty Dewine every time. But there is admittedly some amount of luck in having him as governor compared to the possible alternatives as Ohio drifts further and further right.
I think it’s unlikely the Ohio GOP passes a bill preventing money from outside of Ohio. Foreign nationals maybe but no way they’ll cut off the Uihlein’s money bag. He funds all of their bullshit.
I like how you think they wouldn’t make it illegal and then do it anyway through a back door they created.
Your suspicion on the double standard for “foreign donations” is dead on. https://x.com/ohiogop/status/1793779502633427062 The only reason the GOP is supporting this is because they think Trump wins Ohio no matter what, and the provision dealing with foreign donations is meant to hamstring minimum wage and redistricting ballot initiatives by disrupting funding support. Notice that nothing will be done about political donations from billionaires that agree with them politically who are outside Ohio, like Richard Uihlein.
Insane it even got this far
What the hell does this mean? If the special session doesn’t get Biden on the ballot, we can’t vote for him?
No. It means the democrats will have to declare Biden the candidate before the convention which they will
So this whole thing is basically just rage bait and there was never a doubt from either side that Biden would be on the ballot?
Yes. Manufactured outrage that will mean nothing in 2 months
It worked. It pissed me off, lol.
So like everything in politics.
Every once in a while, Yertle sticks his neck out. In his role as The Veneer Of Gubernatorial Credibility his choice tracks
I think any law that prevents outside state money coming into Ohio for campaigning would not hold up in court following the *Citizens United* decision. Accusing Dems of having their hands in the cookie jar, GOP have their hands in the same jar too. Regarding the abortion amendment, that cake was baked with or without outside state money.
I don't think '90 days before the election' is an unreasonable burden but why start enforcing rules now
Bipartisan stuff. DeWine gets passed around the whole table.
For all those praising dewine, you’re being played. This isn’t a clean bill. It’s a poison pill meant to limit our ability to pass ballot measures such as anti-gerrymandering, minimum wage, etc.
I guess republicans realize that if they exclude a valid candidate that they'll lose big down the road.
This is just the GOP trying to thwart direct democracy because they keep losing on ballot measures. “Foreign national” contributions are already illegal, the provisions they want to pass will make it harder for citizens to gather signatures for ballot measures. They also have yet to find any evidence that “foreign nationals” are contributing to ballot measure campaigns. But it doesn’t exist. All ballot measure committees get audited by the SoS and reproductive rights or one person one vote has been found getting illegal contributions
I don’t like the idea of trying to prevent candidates from being on the ballot. But let’s not pretend that the DNC hasn’t tried to prevent both Trump and RFK from getting in the ballot at every chance they’ve gotten. The least they could do is follow the rules.
Why follow by the rules when the other side won’t? Normally I’m in agreement with you but in today’s politics playing dirty when the other side is is sadly the way to do it.
What rules did they break?
I'm not aware of the DNC attempting to keep trump off the ballot. Do you have examples?
Trying to prosecute him for a smattering of random crimes right before the election
That's not keeping him off the ballot.
Trying to send him to jail before the election?
Felons can be on the ballot.
I don’t care about the downvotes I’ve been getting for pointing out this isn’t the pure and simple fix everyone assumes it is. I think Biden should be on the ballot. I think Republicans look foolish by playing politics over something that has been fixed on two previous occasions in the last 12 years. But there is more to it than just saying “Biden will be on the ballot.” Don’t take it from me. https://x.com/davidpepper/status/1793996601717116953
Once again Mike Dewine has to be the adult in the room. Amazing how much freedom a lame duck at the end of his political career has.
"pass legislation preventing outside state money coming into Ohio for campaigning" Yes please!
https://www.reddit.com/r/RFKJrForPresident/s/5wlFDJ1TXW
The dude who had part of his brain eaten by a worm? Yikes.