• GoodEye8@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    8 months ago

    I get the problem, but I don’t think it’s really applicable. Voting is a basic right of every citizen of the country. Presidency is not for everyone. You wouldn’t want a translator who doesn’t know the languages they’re supposed to translate? Why would you accept a president who is, let’s say mentally challenged?

    I could understand objecting to specifics, like why should mental aptitude get tested, but I don’t understand being against the whole idea. IMO presidency is like a job and like most jobs there are specific requirements that a person needs to meet to be fit for that job. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have certain expectations of people who are running for president.

    • rusticus@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      It’s a good idea but completely meaningless because the “tests” will be biased and run by sycophants on both sides.

    • Ook the Librarian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Wow. I never thought about this. I doubt there will be a time anytime soon where I’d be ok voting for a president who isn’t fluent in english. I’d almost be ok with a grammar test including diagramming sentences from the Constitution.

      But since I’m a liberal I’d accept the test also being done in a relevant First Nation’s language.