4 ms·

Why do they cling to power? I imagine the personality type that seeks political power in the first place tends to want to keep it. It's good to be the king. At

Why do they cling to power? I imagine the personality type that seeks political power in the first place tends to want to keep it. It's good to be the king. At the end of the day, the people continue to elect them. If voters were unhappy with Feinstein's performance (or that of her key aides), the solution was as simple as voting her out. Name recognition is powerful. Seniority leads to leadership of key committees in the US Congress. But, I do agree that this is a problem. RBG was another example - had she retired a few years prior to her death, the state of SCOTUS would be very different today. Was she addicted to the power? Did she truly think nobody younger could do a better job? Same for Feinstein, McConnell, Biden, and many others on both sides of the aisle.

bhouston 3y ago
> If voters were unhappy with Feinstein's performance (or that of her key aides), the solution was as simple as voting her out. Often these incompetent people are in "safe seat" regions. Either heavily democrat or republican. Voters won't switch parties just because representative is incompetent. There should be another options.
- alistairSH 3y ago
  Feinstein was a Senator and CA uses a "jungle primary" for state-wide elections - there's no "safe seat" in that model. In her last election, both final candidates were Democrats. Neither party could unseat her. Voters have been clear that they preferred Feinstein to anybody else. So the question is why? Was it her power in the Senate? Was she particularly good at bringing pork to CA? Or was it just money and the political machine? Probably a lot of that last item - the parties themselves have incentives to keep winning politicians around - they're good for fund-raising.
  - giantrobot 3y ago
    Rank in Senate committee is literally about seniority. Replacing Feinstein meant the state and Democratic Party losing power in the Senate.
    - koolba 3y ago
      The rules for rank in committees is per party and it’s only Democrats that have indefinite positions of seniority. Republicans have caps on number of terms as chair, etc. The only people losing power with her early retirement would have been her handlers. She hasn’t made a decision on her own in a long time. And when she did pretend to do so, the handlers would “help her remember the right choice”.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    Let's not pretend that Feinstein wouldn't still win re-election even now.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
jpadkins 3y ago
> Why do they cling to power? Life or death. The mindset is that when they retire they have nothing to live for and will die soon after. The personality type required to get to a powerful position like Senator can also (frequently * ) not be able to conceive of a meaningful life after office. Quitting office is like giving up on life for these people. *Jimmy Carter is a good counter example. He found a meaningful purpose after holding a powerful office.
- bombcar 3y ago
  Carter is also still alive, and only eight years older than Feinstein (and 18 than Biden). Perhaps the "reason to live" is more important than people realize.

bhouston 3y ago

> If voters were unhappy with Feinstein's performance (or that of her key aides), the solution was as simple as voting her out. Often these incompetent people are in "safe seat" regions. Either heavily democrat or republican. Voters won't switch parties just because representative is incompetent. There should be another options.

alistairSH 3y ago
Feinstein was a Senator and CA uses a "jungle primary" for state-wide elections - there's no "safe seat" in that model. In her last election, both final candidates were Democrats. Neither party could unseat her. Voters have been clear that they preferred Feinstein to anybody else. So the question is why? Was it her power in the Senate? Was she particularly good at bringing pork to CA? Or was it just money and the political machine? Probably a lot of that last item - the parties themselves have incentives to keep winning politicians around - they're good for fund-raising.
- giantrobot 3y ago
  Rank in Senate committee is literally about seniority. Replacing Feinstein meant the state and Democratic Party losing power in the Senate.
  - koolba 3y ago
    The rules for rank in committees is per party and it’s only Democrats that have indefinite positions of seniority. Republicans have caps on number of terms as chair, etc. The only people losing power with her early retirement would have been her handlers. She hasn’t made a decision on her own in a long time. And when she did pretend to do so, the handlers would “help her remember the right choice”.
- bombcar 3y ago
  Let's not pretend that Feinstein wouldn't still win re-election even now.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

jpadkins 3y ago

> Why do they cling to power? Life or death. The mindset is that when they retire they have nothing to live for and will die soon after. The personality type required to get to a powerful position like Senator can also (frequently * ) not be able to conceive of a meaningful life after office. Quitting office is like giving up on life for these people. *Jimmy Carter is a good counter example. He found a meaningful purpose after holding a powerful office.

bombcar 3y ago
Carter is also still alive, and only eight years older than Feinstein (and 18 than Biden). Perhaps the "reason to live" is more important than people realize.