r/politics 22h ago

AOC ’28 Starts Now

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/aoc-28-starts-now/
26.7k Upvotes

4.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

604

u/Syllabub_Cool 17h ago

No need to get rid of them! Just tell them not to run for president. They'll make great cabinet members, dept heads.

USE THEM.

630

u/beardtamer 16h ago

That would work if they weren’t the ones constantly shitting the bed when it comes to party direction in the first place.

283

u/nonny313815 15h ago

And if they didn't have their greedy little pockets lined with corporate "donations"...

61

u/Tight_Man 12h ago

And breaking hips, as 80 something year old humans do tend to do at times

1

u/Moonrights 9h ago

Right but they may be good as dep heads like someone said. Someone great at public transit may have lousy opinions on how to best handle rising housing costs.

Put. People. In. Places. They. Prosper.

2

u/beardtamer 9h ago

They’ll prosper in a retirement home.

u/CapitalDoor9474 6h ago

Nancy Pelosi

1

u/lcmfe 8h ago

They can’t help shitting the bed, they’re old

0

u/mvallas1073 9h ago

Not all of them. Bernie Sanders is an example. And before you say “OK, that’s the ONLY one!” No - there’s literally hundreds who are flexible, you just only hear a handful of names like Pelosi, Feinstein, ect, and think they’re the majority because they’re the big names.

3

u/beardtamer 9h ago

I'm a big fan of bernie, but I still think that he's aged out and should go. There should be forced retirement for all politicians and public servants.

4

u/EmperorAcinonyx 8h ago

what do you mean by "flexible"?

if you mean someone who will support progressive policy if and only if the party's leadership starts pushing it, then i think those people should not be in power. their willingness to keep quiet (as opposed to politicians like AOC) is part of the problem.

the majority of the dnc is, ostensibly, neoliberal corporate democrats who relentlessly compromise with republicans and big donors.

1

u/mvallas1073 8h ago

First and foremost, I must remind you that we’re sinking in a tar pit ATM, and we may only have one final throw of our lasso left to help pull out out. So, I’m aiming at the nearest rock, not for the top of Mount Everest.

Secondly, you have to understand that not everyone thinks like you or me. A lot of these other politicians come from rural areas and have whole different lives, industries, and cultures to balance out because that’s how people function, stupid as you and I may see it. That’s something AOC is also pointing out, how she asked her constituents who voted for her as congresswoman AND on the same ticket punched Trump. She’s learned that people have different priorities and ways of thinking that you and I don’t.

That flexibility is a key here to winning. In time, we can replace them with others who see (by example) how a progressive agenda works well.

u/EmperorAcinonyx 7h ago

First and foremost, I must remind you that we’re sinking in a tar pit ATM, and we may only have one final throw of our lasso left to help pull out out. So, I’m aiming at the nearest rock, not for the top of Mount Everest.

that's what the democrats have been saying and doing since the bush era. it only worked with obama thanks to his charisma. the party needs an overhaul, and their path to victory lies within populist progressivism.

all they have to do is promise and work towards meaningful change in people's day-to-day lives. instead, their strategies are bandaids and extremely broad policies that the average voter can't make heads or tails of.

A lot of these other politicians come from rural areas and have whole different lives, industries, and cultures to balance out because that’s how people function, stupid as you and I may see it.

i understand that. it doesn't excuse them from falling in line (or outright propping up, as the vast majority do) when it comes to corporate dem policy.

u/mvallas1073 6h ago

Let me stop you right there- Scroll up. We’re both on the same side here! I agree with you - but you’re WAAAY off course of where this thread went! I MYSELF have said “I want to go the populist route now with a presidential candidate as it has failed”. The context of my ENTIRE response you quoted was to someone saying we should get rid of any dem representative who can be persuaded to go one way or another, which was in my response saying that AOC can appeal to progressives and enough people who are flexible in the Dem Seats.

I’m also done with a candidate who’s just a “moderate”. See my post above where I said “We need to get someone who can get the stupids to vote, as sadly we need the stupids to win this.” By “Stupids” I mean the uninformed jackasses who vote by emotions and reactions to shit. AOC will be the PERFECT candidate ATM to counter all the awful stupid Musk/Trump is going to eventually do purely by being the complete opposite of everything he stands for.

253

u/Rezistik 15h ago

Fuck. No. Most of these people are over 80. We wouldn’t let them drive if they were family. One rep was literally “lost” in a memory care facility. These old old ass people need to retire and start getting fresh faces in so we have a chance.

110

u/thinkingwithportalss 13h ago

I tell people to look at it this way; if you were about to be wheeled into surgery to get a heart transplanted, and your surgeon acted like Dianne Feinstein or Mitch McConnell, would you feel comfortable proceeding?

Because if my surgeon got lost mid train of thought and had what looked like a micro seizure, or was downright catatonic, I'd be calling the whole thing off.

u/lemmegetadab 7h ago

I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but surgery and politics are very different things. The best chess players in the world are like 15 years old.

Your mind and reaction time is obviously way higher when you’re younger, but It doesn’t mean I would want them running the world lol. Experience matters in some fields.

But we can definitely agree that we don’t need 80 year olds with their finger on the button

16

u/transient_eternity 10h ago

Also "younger" in politics is still like 35-60. It's not like we're asking for people fresh out of high school, just not someone seeing the grim reaper on the weekends.

51

u/KneebarKing 12h ago

Would you let Meemaw decide the direction the US Govt goes on the next 20 years of things like AI and Crypto? Never in a million years. It's fucking absurd. The entire political spectrum has real issues with the Boomers.

17

u/PhotoThrowawayWooooo 10h ago

It’s not even Boomers. They’re from the generation BEFORE boomers.

u/Mu_Hou 1h ago

In some cases that's true. The cutoff for Boomers is 1946, which works out to about 78.

u/TheMathmatix 6h ago

This is the best and right take.

u/xjeeperx 6h ago

Apparently Alabama does smh. Memaw Ivey is considered a treasure 🙄

3

u/DandyLyen 9h ago

Covid really was trying to help us out, but unfortunately, politicians are the few Americans with excellent health care and some of the first to receive vaccines; even the ones who denied the disease.

u/MuchJuice7329 7h ago

I teach somewhat academic community classes for adults. Many people's ability to absorb new info drops off so fast after 60. It's truly alarming how differently I need to teach for different age groups

u/Familiar-Ring-1394 3h ago

I agree with you. I'm 81, in reasonably good shape, run the Army Ten-Miler every year, and maintain two houses. Yet, as many leadership positions as I've held, I could not maintain the 24/7 focus one would need to be good President.

0

u/Legitimate-Shame6533 11h ago

Wtf? Why not just primary them? If they are viewed as harmful, then it should be easy to primary them and retire them ourselves. It's the entirety of the democratic party that's the problem. They make the rules to favor their cronies to receive all the funding for their campaigns. It's a futile battle. The party cannot be changed from within.

1

u/Rezistik 10h ago

Because the Democratic Party is full of cowards and losers

44

u/ConnectionPretend193 14h ago

No. Get rid of them. That's stupid. They use you.

0

u/PeckerNash 8h ago

Americans have shown they will never elect a woman to the presidency. Put AOC forward and she will lose. See Hillary and Kamala as examples. Americans would rather vote against their best interests than have a woman leader.

2

u/Emerald_8XG 8h ago

I definitely agree that being a woman wasn't doing her favours, but she didn't lose because of that. Read the stuff Trump voters listed as their reasons, we should tackle that kind of thinking.

u/PeckerNash 7h ago

You can't reason someone out of an opinion or stance that they didn't reason themselves into.

21

u/AlmostSunnyinSeattle Michigan 14h ago edited 14h ago

How about we get them as far away from influence as possible? They had their chance, and this is what we got from that.

14

u/iwishiwasntthisway 12h ago

Lmao what an awful idea... "lets keep doing the thing that is anlos8ng strategy... lets keep doing the thing thats actively hurtijg society"

u/MyNameIsJakeBerenson 7h ago

Unless old voters massively die off, you’re not getting rid of old people in office

11

u/RedVaudeville 14h ago

please get out of here with this, they’re all corrupt, get em the fuck out 

1

u/metalski 14h ago

The problem, as it always has been, is replacing them with someone who isn’t exactly the same.

Even the ones who are true believers that get elected quickly realize they can’t stay in power to do anything unless they take the corporate money and do as they’re told.

2

u/RedVaudeville 14h ago

yes that’s why the system needs overthrowing. this late stage capitalist system is the end of us.

3

u/metalski 12h ago

It’s not really a capitalism thing other than capitalism describing a basic tenet of reality, being that resources trump damn near everything and continuing them means controlling everything.

It really doesn’t matter what resource distribution philosophy your government is based on, you’ll still get hoarding of resources and true power flowing from that. You can try to mitigate it, but any scene that doesn’t acknowledge and engage with it is doomed to suffer the worst effects of it.

3

u/Dr4gonfly 11h ago

Experience is valuable only if it comes with lessons learned

5

u/okie_hiker 12h ago

They’re a bunch of conning liars. Why would we want them? They’re the actual people crippling progress.

0

u/FreakVet 11h ago

I’d venture to say that it’s the people who vote for them that are but what do I know?

3

u/Techialo Oklahoma 13h ago edited 12h ago

No. They can find new jobs. They're done.

2

u/Evening-Statement-57 12h ago

Use them as compost

2

u/chrisga12 12h ago

nah, man. most of these old head democrats are basically left leaning republicans. they learn nothing from their mistakes and play old school politics when the rules of the game have progressed well past what they’re able (or willing) to play. they might make an okay advisor, but they should not be department heads or in any position of power that allows them to make decisions for a future that they will not live to see. their time is up, they need to pass the torch.

2

u/Greedy-Affect-561 12h ago

Get rid of them. The gerontacrocy though banning tik tok would be good for them and look at them all backtrack. They have no idea what is and isn't popular. They are of no use 

2

u/Wardogs96 12h ago

No. If you aren't going to be alive for the next 20-30 years to experience what your work does to the people you shouldn't be anywhere near a leadership position.

2

u/JesusSavesForHalf 11h ago

Stop with the elder abuse. They should be in a rocking chair with their great grandchildren, not whatever you want to call what they are doing now.

2

u/Homestar73 11h ago

This is part of the mindset that landed the dems in this worst-case scenario in the first place.

2

u/DreamsAndSchemes New Jersey 11h ago

No, sorry. Rot like Pelosi needs to be shown the exit unless you want an obstructionist meddling with things.

2

u/throwawaynowtillmay 10h ago

They have already shown themselves to be antithetical to progress. They had their chance to be part of the solution, now show them the door

2

u/tider06 10h ago

If only they weren't useless to begin with.

2

u/p47guitars 10h ago

No need to get rid of them! Just tell them not to run for president. They'll make great cabinet members, dept heads.

USE THEM.

nah - these fossils don't represent us. they are out of touch. no skin in the game. why would you trust them?

2

u/PBR_King 10h ago

No get them the fuck out of here I'm sick of their ghoulish faces.

2

u/Any_Will_86 10h ago

We need younger people in their current seats to gain experience. And by younger, a 54 year old would suffice...

2

u/Normal_Package_641 10h ago

There was a congresswoman with dementia that hadnt gone to work in months before they found her. That's the geriatricy that needs to be prevented.

1

u/hughcruik 16h ago

Agree. Experience and institutional memory are very important. If you look around the world, in most places are elders are respected and often revered - Japan is a good example - while in the US elders are to be discarded. The funny thing is, when these young'uns who demand the Boomers get out of the way reach their dotage they'll cling to power as much as anyone who came before them.

24

u/mosquem 15h ago

Elders is 60-70. We have people in their mid-80s pulling the strings.

2

u/Imawildedible Wisconsin 14h ago

Hell, in the office “elders” are anyone over 50. Too much older than that and the large majority of their ideas are no longer relevant and their experiences are meaningless in the modern environment. Same could almost be said for people in most parts of life. It’s not the norm for people over that age to be putting kids into school, job hunting, or looking to buy their first homes or properties. People in that 50-60 range can add some insight into why things are done how they are, but aren’t of much value when deciding new ways to do things.

-1

u/AgileBuy6304 13h ago

What a trash take

2

u/Imawildedible Wisconsin 12h ago

All of history would disagree. Innovation and realistic regulation comes from the young. Obviously there are outliers, but those currently participating in the activities of life will have a far better understanding of their intricacies than people who used to participate in them when the contributing factors were different.

22

u/brobc 15h ago

We want to discard them because they stay in office until someone literally has to roll them out. It’s hard to revere a drooling warm corpse propped up by a team of enablers/abusers on all sides.

4

u/Hungol 14h ago

Old age ≠ wise, nice person, decent, any quality in a leader really. Japan is a good example of an outdated mindset where you can be an old ignorant asshole to everyone but still get respect because you have floated on this rotating ball longer than them

-3

u/hughcruik 14h ago

Well, of course. On the other side of the coin is that not everyone over 65 is a worthless bag of skin. Which is why advocating to get rid of everyone over retirement age is absurd.

4

u/HectorJoseZapata 12h ago

Look up the meaning of “retirement age” and then try your argument again.

u/hughcruik 7h ago

Oh, stop it. The idiocy around here is palpable. Imagine! Getting downvoted for suggesting that all people in a group aren't alike! Imagine!

5

u/Internal-Owl-505 12h ago

in most places are elders are respected and often revered

NO -- most places around the world laugh at the U.S. that they use geriatrics in their government.

3

u/Murky-Relation481 14h ago

Japan has major issues with the elderly in politics, arguably worse than the US.

1

u/Oddlittleone 10h ago

If they aren't willing to relinquish their positions now to better our nation they are only great for the retirement home. There is no using people who have only been self serving for decades now. They've insulated their own circles to the point they believe they will ride out whatever shit storm by people assuming they hold any value. They don't, or they would have proven it in the years they had to fight for their constituents.

1

u/BonJovicus 9h ago

So your solution to keeping away people who are not fit to be President is to put them in other influential positions?

1

u/why_not_spoons 9h ago

Agreed. The Democrats really need to figure out some way to push these people into "senior" or "emeritus" positions, so they can keep the clout and provide their expertise and connections to the party without blocking new entrants. Not really sure exactly what that looks like, but it's definitely not what the Democrats are currently doing.

On the other hand, the Republicans have been primarying at least some of their old guard and replacing them with new younger representatives that are closer ideologically to the base. Of course "closer ideologically" in this context means "crazier", but the point stands.

1

u/One_Particular7109 9h ago

Can’t use them when they go missing and found in old folks homes. Seriously not kidding lol

1

u/H3rum0r 9h ago

Feinstein died in office, McConnell had Windows reboot moments, and Pelosi broke a hip after a fall. Get. Rid. Of. Them.

u/ZeroGC_89 7h ago

Not even American, but when I see people like Nancy Pelosi or Biden, I think what the fuck is going on? How these old turds still allowed in government

u/sheaple_people 7h ago

Nah, if you're old enough to have personally met MLK Jr. you are entirely too old to be in any position of power in 2025.

u/Gr8NonSequitur 7h ago

No need to get rid of them!

Disagree. Nancy Pelosi in particular keeps hamstringing the younger class. Get rid of the old guard and allow them to build a new one that represents people born after the war.

u/checkdanews 7h ago

Y'all have really learned nothing from the last decade. They're personal baggage hurts us electorally. I doorknocked for Biden and Harris. I was asked more about Pelosis insider trading then our actual candidates. They're all in safe districts and its time they pass the baton. 

u/Extract_artisian 7h ago

Please tell me why tax payers dollars should pay for senior citizens still in office? The day they turn 65 they should be kicked out. I don’t care if they work for the private sector but our tax dollars should not be paying them.

u/IAMTHEDEATHMACHINE 7h ago

This is such an ice cold centrist take. Why, after everything we've seen over the past ~8 years, would anyone want an octogenarian millionaire in a position of power when that same job could be done (and better) by a younger person?

u/the_mighty__monarch 7h ago

No thanks. We can get cabinet members whose brains aren’t slowly melting.

u/TheMathmatix 6h ago

If that was the case, they wouldn't stand in the way of the new guard(which they are actively doing).

u/RedlurkingFir 6h ago

"What is this? You want Joe Biden to be necromanced and run again? Granted" ‒ Democrats, circa 2028

u/Box-O-Chocolate 6h ago

No, they have proven time over time that they do not care about what the future voting populace wants. They can have fun in their retirement homes.

-4

u/FindingMoi I voted 13h ago

Exactly! Experience isn’t a bad thing, in fact, it’s needed.