this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
216 points (96.6% liked)

politics

19146 readers
3364 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A handful of GOP senators is weighing whether to force a fraught internal debate about their leadership’s future after Mitch McConnell’s second public freeze-up in a month.

Some rank-and-file Republicans have discussed the possibility of a broader conversation once senators return to Washington next week, according to a person directly involved in the conversations who confirmed them on condition of anonymity. Party leadership is not currently involved in those discussions, and nothing has been decided yet, this person added.

It takes just five Republican senators to force a special conference meeting, which is the most direct way to have a specific discussion about the minority leader after his public pause on Wednesday revived questions about his condition. But the Senate GOP also holds private lunches two or three times a week, giving members another forum for hashing out the direction of the party’s leadership — one that could forestall the need for a special confab.

top 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ohlaph 57 points 1 year ago (4 children)

There should be both term limits and age restrictions sumilar to air traffic controllers.

No reason someone over 65 should be deciding the future of our country.

[–] LordOfTheChia 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At the very minimum, there should be cognitive tests to ensure they have their mental faculties and agency.

There's some folks who are still sharp well into their 80s.

Others can suffer dementia and other severe cognitive issues in their 30s and 40s.

Putting an arbitrary age limit (like say 65) would also keep out any folks who want to run after they retire (and who can't afford to run for office before then).

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

Putting an arbitrary age limit (like say 65) would also keep out any folks who want to run after they retire (and who can't afford to run for office before then).

That sounds like a separate problem that shouldn't be used to argue against mandatory retirements for the absolute highest political positions.

[–] thessnake03 14 points 1 year ago

I unironically heard a Republican coworker say there needs to be an age limit, specifically referring to Biden. I wanted to logic them out further for the rest, but didn't have it in me. I try to talk politics as little as possible in the office.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

air traffic controllers have term limits?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not that providing years of public service has given anyone enough experience to serve well.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

There are plenty of ways to serve that don't involve directly holding power. They could, for example, become advisors for new legislators.

[–] nnullzz 38 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Don’t really align with either Democrats or Republicans, but it’s sad and angering to see a politician seemingly unfit for office holding on to the last bit of power possible. Decent people would recognize their time is up and let someone else take the limelight. This goes for both sides.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Tell me about it:

George HW Bush born 1924

Bill Clinton born 1946

George W Bush born 1946

Barack Obama born 1961

Donald Trump born 1946

Joe Biden born 1942

Time keeps progressing and politicians keep just getting fucking older.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It's not just politicians. That entire generation clings to power and jobs, refusing, either due to ego or that they have trickle down economics'd themselves out of a social safety net and pension.

A huge majority of the leadership positions in major companies are old people. They need to learn to retire and step aside.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

we're gonna see some changes soon because the people making all of the decisions will all die of old age within a 15 year period

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They're most likely to be replaced by the hangers-on who have been dutifully agreeing with those people for years and now finally get the job they were hoping to get ages ago. It's not like Nancy Pelosi passing power to her hand-chosen successor yielded a shakeup in the House Democrats.

And Jeffries is still pretty young. In a lot of other cases the young whipper-snapper waiting for their chance once the dinosaur dies is already above retirement age. They'll need to milk that until they die to feel like they got their rightful chance.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

indeed, but at least there will be some new faces and certain issues like the war on drugs will finally see change that was delayed only because old farts with outdated attitudes are clogging up the government.

[–] dojan 3 points 1 year ago

That’s honestly not soon enough.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Here's to hoping. I'd like to be able to buy a house some day.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

The money hoarded by the boomers likely won't be released back into the economy though.. It will move upstream to the rich vultures who bled them dry through end of life care (retirement homes, home aide agencies, funeral industry, etc).

[–] sturmblast 1 points 1 year ago

time will solve that

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Healthcare is too good now. It's the new normal.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's pretty simple really. First you must want to work in public service. Next, you run for office after getting backing from your fellow citizens. Campaign where your voters are. Win an election. Remember not to go farther than your experience can take you. Ŕveryone you listed won a (sometimes two) nation wide race.

You are young, but no younger than 35, and you think you can do that? Bon chance.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Trump did not. W only did once, and only because people idiotically vote for the incumbent whenever they feel threatened. The fact that we have a braindead system that lets you become president after losing a nationwide election doesn't change the fact that they lost.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

People vote for a candidate for many different reasons. Sometimes it's party affiliations, sometimes its a single issue,

Everyone on that list except for HW Bush, Trump and Biden (as of right now) served two terms

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not sure why Obama is on here. He was only 47 at the start of his presidency and hasn’t held any office for a while.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

It's a list of presidents in order since HW... so Obama is on the list.

[–] Foggyfroggy 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Seriously. The whole lot of them should be out enjoying their time, playing with their great grand kids. Why they would even want to stay is beyond me (unless they’ve been enjoying themselves this whole time which is probably the way it is).

The worst part is it shows a failure to pass on the right skills because they don’t trust the next generation to lead.

[–] TruTollTroll 9 points 1 year ago

Because power and control are a hellova drug and they can't control their grandkids like they can yours and my grandkids to suffer for exchanged obedience from the parents.. its messed up

[–] LEDZeppelin 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

His name is Glitch, get it right ffs

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

That's a fucking horror movie poster. Look at that creepy old man smiling in the back.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

I'm all for replacing McConnell as long as all Committee members are frozen in place. If the new minority leader wants to name new ones, then Schumer gets to replace Feinstein

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

If I was a Republican I'd be fucking embarrassed to have someone who is obviously looking this weak and sick as a prominent party leader.

[–] BustinJiber 3 points 1 year ago

McConnell Freeze - new freeware standing simulator now on Steam.

[–] reddig33 3 points 1 year ago

Good lord that accompanying photo. Dude looks like he doesn’t know where he is.

[–] sturmblast 2 points 1 year ago

I'm a little torn about how I feel about Mitch McConnell lately. if you would have asked me 8 years ago how I felt about Mitch McConnell I couldn't have cared less if he lived or died. but with the current state of the Republican party he's one of the last standing members of the Old guard even though he enabled a lot of what's happened I kind of feel like his recent health issues or direct result of him having internal conflict to some extent with how things have gone in the party and in the country. I won't shed a tear for him if he does end up passing away or retiring or whatever but I really worry about what replaces him.

[–] eran_morad -5 points 1 year ago

Meet deez nuts