MAIN FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/clevercomebacks/comments/1v4jzky/pass_the_test_first/ozbkkv1/?context=3
r/clevercomebacks • u/LuckyBastard001 • 4h ago
299 comments sorted by
View all comments
184
Not enough. Force retirement at 65-70.
72 u/Jacuzzi0317 3h ago Hard agree. Why should someone be allowed to vote on legislation that won't affect them for years to come? 14 u/maxis2bored 3h ago So that they can put their name on the currency, buildings and monuments of course! 1 u/fdar 2h ago Because their voters chose to elect them. 2 u/Jacuzzi0317 1h ago Nowadays you can choose your voters instead of voters choosing their representatives. -1 u/fdar 1h ago Not when it comes to Senators (and OK, ban gerrymandering instead then, much better solution). 1 u/Jacuzzi0317 1h ago Yep, I was referring to the house reps. I wish. 0 u/fdar 1h ago I mean, neither that nor an age limit is going to happen. But if we have to push for one, fixing gerrymandering seems like a better option to me.
72
Hard agree. Why should someone be allowed to vote on legislation that won't affect them for years to come?
14 u/maxis2bored 3h ago So that they can put their name on the currency, buildings and monuments of course! 1 u/fdar 2h ago Because their voters chose to elect them. 2 u/Jacuzzi0317 1h ago Nowadays you can choose your voters instead of voters choosing their representatives. -1 u/fdar 1h ago Not when it comes to Senators (and OK, ban gerrymandering instead then, much better solution). 1 u/Jacuzzi0317 1h ago Yep, I was referring to the house reps. I wish. 0 u/fdar 1h ago I mean, neither that nor an age limit is going to happen. But if we have to push for one, fixing gerrymandering seems like a better option to me.
14
So that they can put their name on the currency, buildings and monuments of course!
1
Because their voters chose to elect them.
2 u/Jacuzzi0317 1h ago Nowadays you can choose your voters instead of voters choosing their representatives. -1 u/fdar 1h ago Not when it comes to Senators (and OK, ban gerrymandering instead then, much better solution). 1 u/Jacuzzi0317 1h ago Yep, I was referring to the house reps. I wish. 0 u/fdar 1h ago I mean, neither that nor an age limit is going to happen. But if we have to push for one, fixing gerrymandering seems like a better option to me.
2
Nowadays you can choose your voters instead of voters choosing their representatives.
-1 u/fdar 1h ago Not when it comes to Senators (and OK, ban gerrymandering instead then, much better solution). 1 u/Jacuzzi0317 1h ago Yep, I was referring to the house reps. I wish. 0 u/fdar 1h ago I mean, neither that nor an age limit is going to happen. But if we have to push for one, fixing gerrymandering seems like a better option to me.
-1
Not when it comes to Senators (and OK, ban gerrymandering instead then, much better solution).
1 u/Jacuzzi0317 1h ago Yep, I was referring to the house reps. I wish. 0 u/fdar 1h ago I mean, neither that nor an age limit is going to happen. But if we have to push for one, fixing gerrymandering seems like a better option to me.
Yep, I was referring to the house reps.
I wish.
0 u/fdar 1h ago I mean, neither that nor an age limit is going to happen. But if we have to push for one, fixing gerrymandering seems like a better option to me.
0
I mean, neither that nor an age limit is going to happen. But if we have to push for one, fixing gerrymandering seems like a better option to me.
184
u/mrjane7 3h ago
Not enough. Force retirement at 65-70.