Political succession - Young, brash, and inexperienced, versus old and senile!

Wow, both sound like horrible options. Almost seems familiar. Oh wait, it is familiar. Yep, both were horrible options. I guess I would go with the one that held similar beliefs to my own, especially regarding direction of the country and view of the Constitution. Still, in the recent option, neither one was anywhere near in-line with my views, the older one was less corrupt, revered the Constitution slightly higher than the younger one, and showed more of a grasp of common sense than the younger, so I went with the older one. So far the younger one has appeared to get worse and is unwilling to learn from his mistakes or even admit that he may have a flaw, shows complete disrespect for those whom disagree with him and is completely unwilling to listen to what they have to say, and apparently only is concerned with his agenda and not the good of the country. Not sure the older one would have been much better, but it would be almost impossible for him to be worse.

hi vandana as an elderly woman myself who is not senile, fortunly , I would never pick a leader who was senile no matter what his age. You need someone who can think And function 'intelligently and the young inexperienced one can soon get experience and will be less brash and less hasty with time.

This is a thought provoking discussion vandana, thanks for it. I think it depends on the prevailing condition of the country. If the country needs immediate growth, let us go for the offensive game with younger people (let us take a chance), otherwise a slow but steady growth with older people is good for any country, this is my stand. (If the need is urgent, call youngsters like me, hehehe)

[b] I'd choose not to vote! Why bother? Inexperience these days can be deadly, if you're speaking of the presidency. It's not a position that's a good place for on-the-job training! I'm serious. I'd rather not vote at all, or maybe I'd write in a candidate. But the choice you propose is no choice at all, really. Both would be dangerous people to put in charge. This reminds me, has anyone heard lately from the "None of the Above" movement? Maggie "WHERE'S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE?"[/b]

I will not choose any of them. I like middle aged person as a leader who is experienced,smart, very active and honest.

Hi vandana, If i were to choose from them I would go more for the young and brash, and hasty and inexperienced than the oldie who are all downed in corruption. The young and inexperienced atleast would try to do something good for the country but the oldies would do nothing e2xcept siphon the money for the development of the nation.

Hi Vandana, if that is the only choice then it is a pretty bad one but there's nothing more really to add to Hatley's answer here.