Temperament definitely changes but their are positives and negatives. Each career has a different peak based on the combination of mental aptitude and experience required. Careers needing quick and innovative thinking tends to skew younger while those relying on heavily on experience tend to be older.Pacfanweb said:Fair enough. I don't think someone that young is remotely equipped in any way, to handle such a job.IseWolf22 said:Their youth would be the #1 thing they were attacked for the entire cycle. If they overcame that and still won, they are likely an exceptional individual.Pacfanweb said:Would you be okay with a 21 year old being President? We're not talking about other/current Presidents and whether they were good choices.IseWolf22 said:What about the last 30 years makes you think that the age requirement has led to better leaders being elected?Pacfanweb said:So...should a 21 year old be able to run for President?acslater1344 said:Pacfanweb said:PackBacker07 said:
Why? If I'm not mistaken, that would be by far the most restrictive "age law" on the books?
Because kids don't know anything. They have no business voting at that age.
If you can't be president until you're 35, you ought not to be able to vote for president until you're at least 30.
Again, unless you're serving in the military.
Dumbest post I've ever seen on this site and that is saying A LOT. Some cranky old man bull**** (I'm 33 FWIW).
So I'd say that I don't think it would ever happen, even if it was allowed. But if it did occur, I wouldn't be any more concerned they'd be a terrible leader than the politicians we select from today.
Neither did the folks who made the minimum age 35.
That's why we don't have 21 year old CEO's on Wall Street, 21 year old generals and admirals, etc.
There's a different temperament that you acquire as you age...even the bad older candidates are better IMO than anyone that young, simply because of that.
There is a reason most successful start ups are led by founders in their 20s. Most STEM nobel prize discoveries are from scientists in the 25-35 range. Meanwhile the best historians, authors, etc tend to be in their 60s.
There is a lot of research on this for CEOs (maybe the best correlation to a president/governor) and while studies vary, it seems like most tend to find that this type of career peaks in the 50s. This doesn't mean a 21 year old or an 80 year old can't do the job, but they likely would do their best right in the middle.
So while I think a 21 year old should be able to run, I say someone in their 50s is probably who I think would be ideal. I think legislators could be younger though. If we want to see creative problem solving of complex issues, we need more of congress in their 30s and 40s. The current average age is 58 for the house and 62 for the senate, but leadership is dominated by those in their 70s.
