2 ms·
These aren't the leaders leaving. They're the rank-and-file. We're seeing right now that a change to the status quo is at least as likely to be worse, not bett
by jfengel 2y ago
These aren't the leaders leaving. They're the rank-and-file.
We're seeing right now that a change to the status quo is at least as likely to be worse, not better. It's very easy to call for things to be different; it's very hard to come up with something different that gets wide approval.
So I get nervous when people call for "change", without specifying what change. And especially when they cite their inexperience as a virtue. (That applies to 80-year-olds as well as 30-year-olds.)
I do wonder if these Senators are missing an opportunity. The status quo gets to be the way it is because people fear the alternative will be worse. But we're rapidly reaching a point where the alternative cannot be worse.
- dangus 2y agoI definitely didn’t just mean leadership like speaker of the house or senate leaders, I mean leadership as in congress itself, because by definition members of congress are all party leaders compared to more local levels of politics. Many of the rank and file need to be replaced. The median age of the senate is over 60 years old, and many congresspeople are staying in seats long after their health has badly deteriorated (Mitch McConnell and Diane Feinstein as recent examples). Besides just age, I am also specifically dealing what change is merged. Democrats need congresspeople who understand how the modern systems of society and how their opposition works. This isn’t about age, as people like Bernie Sanders clearly understand those concepts well and knows how to articulate them. But then you have leaders like Chuck and Nancy who are clearly not what they used to be. In the last presidency they were negotiating with Trump like they were old pals in the same of party. Now Nancy Pelosi is pulling a Diane Feinstein and Chuck Schumer is coasting.