In Trump’s first term, grassroots Democrats focused their ire on the Republican president. But now, after President Joe Biden’s reluctance to step aside in 2024 at age 81 helped pave the way for Trump’s return to the White House, many see their party’s own veterans as part of the problem.
Love how 40s to 50s is what we consider a young politician theee days. It’s a start, but sad
It’s going to be a tough sell. The DNC is convinced the way to avoid bleeding seats is to move to the right and keep the same old white people.
I am convinced that the #1 problem in this country right now is the notion that having a primary challenger is somehow a sign of weakness. Yes, even more important than the creeping fascism, because it directly enables it. Even the opposition may be inclined to keep the creeping fascism creeping along if it guarantees they can keep their job.
The House, in particular, is meant to be the body that is most responsive to the people, because they are theoretically accountable to them every two years. But if you are in a heavily gerrymandered district, and can ensure that you never see a Primary challenge, then it is essentially a lifetime appointment.
I don’t particularly mind if there folks keep their jobs into their 70’s, as long as they really are the best person for that district. But if they never get any meaningful primary challenge how would we know?
Part of the problem is that everything is seniority based. So even if some new upstart may better represent the will of their district, they won’t be able to accomplish anything when compared to the person who’s been in Congress for 30+ years.
AOC did it.
Because Congress and Senate should have 2 term limits. These old cunts just look after themselves.
The term limit is the election. Or should be anyway.
Not in a corrupt system where politicians buy votes with more power they get as they get older in office. Some of these assholes die of old age in office and people still want to elect them.
If buying votes were that easy wouldn’t you just need money?
Seems like your bog-standard millionaire could buy an office if that was the mechanism.
That is correct coupled with how everything is gamified and that it’s statistically more like for an incumbent to win. Game theory, while a valid field of study, has really fucked us over
I am convinced that the #1 problem in this country right now is the notion that having a primary challenger is somehow a sign of weakness.
I mean, it’s absolutely a sign of weakness - which is to say, it’s a sign that the incumbent isn’t popular. The institutional response to an incumbent’s unpopularity is to mask it by forcing rivals out of the primary process (as with Biden going uncontested in '24).
The House, in particular, is meant to be the body that is most responsive to the people, because they are theoretically accountable to them every two years.
In 1803, a single House Rep had a district of about 34,000 people. In 1903, a district held 193,167 people. In 1953, 334,587 people. In 2023, 761,169 people. These seats weren’t great at representing large-ish constituencies 220 years ago. They’re absolutely dogshit at it now. Members exist to represent the party on behalf of local party members not the people of the district. In many cases, a Rep is explicitly antagonistic towards minority members of their district in an attempt to curry favor with the majority.
The two year window is not about direct accountability to the district nearly so much as it is direct accountability towards the donor class that sponsors their campaigns. And the near-continuous need to fundraise in order to cover the cost of advertising and self-promotion within the district has turned House Reps into patronage positions of the most servile sort.
The problem with primaries, in the modern political equation, is that they drive up the cost for donors to hold any single seat. And for parties to control a House majority (as non-incumbents are more vulnerable to a seat flip).
So suppressing primaries, suppressing voter turnout, and suppressing opposition parties through gerrymandering are - at the end of the day - cost control measures for national parties and corporate interests.
I don’t particularly mind if there folks keep their jobs into their 70’s, as long as they really are the best person for that district.
They’re the best because at that age they’ve proven themselves to be unfailingly loyal. This is, again, an issue of cost control and risk mitigation. Nobody who has been in the Senate for 50 years is going to pitch any curveballs. Nobody who has climbed to the top of the ladder in their House Committee is going to deviate far from their proven ideology.
Unlike with freshmen who can waffle erratically from their original campaign pledges (see: Fetterman and Sinema, for instance) the 70 year old multi-election incumbent - a la Chuck Schumer or Diane Feinstein - is very predictable.
Le sigh. It’s not like younger people are not susceptible to the problems of being captured by the donor class.
JFC, focusing on age is one of the dumbest fucking takes going. I get it if people take issue with certain individuals that happen to be older, but drawing some arbitrary line at number of times around the sun and saying “boomer bad” is just idiotic.
I cannot help but think that this is some kind of psyop.
I mean I’m not going to disagree that a blanket all old must go all young must stay approach. Obviously trading Bernie Sanders for Rick Santorum would not be a good move.
That being said what does need to be dealt with is incumbancy bias as a whole. IE no matter how shitty they’ve been, the effect is over and over again keep the same guy regardless of how good or bad he is until he chooses to retire or drops dead.
The approach should be “replace the people who haven’t been looking out for their people”.
I dunno, dementia-riddled old fuck’s is not my first choice to run the country. Being bought by donors is bad, but it’s a different problem. Just cause we need to fix one problem, doesn’t mean we should ignore all the other problems.
And that’s ignoring the tankie wankers in the thread who can’t shut up.
November will be a ride.
Mai Vang, a Sacramento council member running for California’s 7th Congressional District, has her campaign website at maiforus.com
Evan Turnage, an antitrust lawyer challenging Mississippi’s 2nd District incumbent, has his campaign website at evanturnage.com
Justin Pearson, a Tennessee state representative running for the 9th Congressional District, has his campaign website at votejustinj.com
Luke Bronin, former Hartford mayor challenging Connecticut’s 1st District incumbent, has his campaign website at broninforcongress.com
Kore beyond the article:
Deja Foxx, a Gen Z candidate running for Arizona’s 7th Congressional District (special election), has her campaign website at dejafoxx.com
Jake Rakov, a 37-year-old political strategist challenging 15-term incumbent Brad Sherman in California’s 32nd Congressional District, has his campaign website at jakeforcongress.com
George Hornedo, a 34-year-old former Obama administration and Buttigieg campaign staffer running in Indiana’s 7th Congressional District, has his campaign website at georgehornedo.com
Sara Innamorato, a first-time candidate is running against Dom Costa in Pennsylvania’s House District 21.
On the Senate side:
Graham Platner (Maine), a 42-year-old Marine and Army veteran challenging 74-year-old incumbent Susan Collins. His campaign website is grahampforusenate.com
Nathan Sage (Iowa), a Marine veteran and mechanic challenging 56-year-old incumbent Joni Ernst. His campaign website is sageforsenate.com
Mallory McMorrow (Michigan), a state senator running for the open seat previously held by 68-year-old Gary Peters. Her campaign website is mcmorrowformichigan.com
Zach Wahls (Iowa), a state senator challenging for the U.S. Senate seat, has his campaign website at wahlsforsenate.com
Good to see some candidates taking a crack at the gerontocracy
🙄 does the neo-lib political caste have to be this in-your-face about how irrelevant they are?
Until we force them out of office, unironically yes. One of the things those with power get off on is exploiting the vulnerable and powerless as a flex. It’s the same reason so many of them hung out on Trump-Epstein island back in the day. They enjoy rubbing our faces in the fact that they consistently do nothing to help us, and routinely sell out our best interests to the donor class.
I’m a huge advocate of not voting, but the idea of Democrats my age or younger is tempting… I think people younger than me have some chance of ignoring Boomers and changing the direction of things.
But if they’re Zionists, they can get fucked
Bro let me introduce you to genZ male population
Oh honey, it’s not just the boomers. Go over to rumble and YouTube and check out their cast of conservative streamers and you will see that this MAGA crap has infected the youth as well, and they are very energized. Many of them are in their 20’s, which means they’ve spent half their lives with this toxicity as the norm.
You’re an advocate of not voting? Then I hope you get the day you voted for.
Oh, they did. And they seem happy about it.
Even writing an even-handed, conciliatory comment triggers the genocide lovers
Dude. I mean this in all sincerity: Eat my entire ass. Conflating voting with support for genocide might not be the stupidest thing I’ve ever encountered, but it’s gotta be in the top twenty.
Advocating non-voting is hardly even-handed. It’s just plain stupid
I’m a huge advocate of not voting
Your opinion literally does not matter. You get no say here or anywhere unless you vote.
Hey look! A binary-brained liberal!
You can literally vote for anyone you want and it would be better than non-voting
Are you 12?
Worse, they’re a .ml user.
At least the 12 year old has a chance to grow out of it.
Yikes!
Oh now it’s name calling.
I’m old enough to have seen that putting Democrats in power accomplishes nothing through my entire adult life
Anyway, don’t you have a genocide to support somewhere?
Oh now it’s name calling.
Deeply ironic for the one calling people who disagree with him “genocide lovers”
You called me a “binary-brained liberal”. You literally called me a name first. And to argue at a level which you are more adept, my rebuttal is this:
I am rubber, and you are glue…
That’s an actual assessment of your attitude. 🤷
I’m old enough to see when someone spreads lies, it’s not an accident.
Why don’t you engage directly with my comments instead?
deleted by creator
it’s 2026, everyone is either a Zionist or an Anti-Semite on the interweb.
I’m a huge advocate of not voting,
Ya’ll .ml users are NOT beating the allegations.
What’s the matter? Brutal military occupation is only acceptable when our presidents help it happen overseas?
I am not trained to untangle these incoherent strings-of-consciousness ravings. You will need to escalate this ticket to another department.
Are you saying you aren’t capable of recognizing genocide?
Glad your not vote stopped the genocide. Very brave of you.
I’m saying you’re a walking contradiction, who demands radical change but cannot be bothered with politics or nuance, your kind would plunge the world into equal or worse kinds of fascism and suffering than we have now because it’s equally mindless but cloaked in some kind of righteous entitlement and unrealistic perspectives of the world that only comes from ignorance and personal, emotional reactionary attitudes and a desire for vindication and validation over better outcomes.
You want people to listen to you, to be provoked and to mobilize to do something, but you’re doing it so very wrong that I can only imagine you’re just a child who is barely learning how to influence people and be understood. Or you’re thriving in some kind of environment of abuse and hate directed at you, and like an incel trolling general public chats, you’re just here to validate some kind of hate for yourself you can’t let go of.
Now you’re blocked by the way, I won’t see your rebuttal which I am sure would have been quite clever, so save your energy for the rest of the crowd here you seem to be really winning over.
Voters have zero impact on policy and politics, that’s a luxury only afforded to the monied class. Your diatribe suggests you believe you have representation in government…
Remind us, what happened on October 7th, 2023?
I’m sure not voting will change things. Good job, dumbass. Maybe try a primary so you’re not stuck with the mic puppets.
Instead you’re giving them a rubber stamp
This. These assholes are like the people who say they’re okay eating anywhere and then bitch about the restaurant they wind up at the entire time.
So you’re saying you’re fine with genocide, right?
Andy Kaufman? Is that you?
I’m a huge advocate of not voting
An objectively and intentionally evil thing to advocate for.
No, voting for people who aid and abet genocide is what’s evil.
I think your priorities are out of whack
You had a chance to push back against Trump but you said no. It goes without saying what is reasonable to think about someone who does that. You can write thousands of words pretending you’re justified but it never, ever, ever will be. Shame on you.
It wasn’t nonvoters that gave us Trump, it was liberals both times. Your party knew neither Biden or Harris could beat Trump but refused to primary Biden, collected billions in fundraising, and gave the false sense that victory was possible. They would have kept Biden if the monied class didn’t insist Biden drop out after his debate. Liberals dismissed his mental decline as a stutter when the signs were there before 2020 but insisted he was the right one for the job.
Trump is a self inflicted wound brought on by liberal arrogant hubris.
Yes you’re right. The people who had no better choice are to blame, absolutely not the people made a specific choice to do nothing. Brilliant.
Liberals never demand better from the politicians, they wait until they are told who and what to support . You confuse doing nothing with refusing to support your shade of fascism.
I don’t have power.
The Biden administration had power. The DNC has power. They did nothing to stop Trump. Indeed, they fought Mamdani harder than they fought Trump.
And they are fine with systematically starving children. That’s who you’re standing up for. You’re punching down at me because now you’re forced to see the genocide in your own backyard.
You put Nazis in power and you’re glad you did.
Liberals did that
The United States has always been a fascist project 🤷
Advocating not voting is utterly stupid. That’s how we got here
It’s literally Nazi support. Except actually probably worse. Because it helps Nazis and attempts to convince others to as well, under the bullshit guise of “leftism”
No, how we got here is by voting “the lesser evil” for three decades.
Longer than that, WEB DuBois mentions liberal lesser evil in a 1956 speech. 70 years ago
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/298.html#%3A~%3Atext=In+1956%2C+I%2Cand+rather+silly.
Aren’t you that loser who brags about getting perma banned?
They believe electoralism will create change as if they have any influence on policy or politics. The only change it creates is benefitting the wealthy at our expense.
American politics is the only field where a 40 year old person seems like a baby.
I’m not a huge fan of electoral politics but I have met Mai Vang a few times and I believe her convictions are real. Whether they will survive contact with a system designed to grind them down I can’t say but she’s by far the best person in the sac city council currently and I don’t doubt she would be one of the most progressive members of congress.
They will never realize reform is a failed experiment. Junior members of Congress are never given positions of influence or power until they are deemed to be no threat to the status quo.
