>

Democrats have a strong bench with VP Harris, Newsom in CA, Whitmer in MI and plenty others. Time to pass the torch.
"being in your 80s is not great, trust me, I know from personal experience" >

Yeah, was kind of a pot and kettle situation lol >

Not really, seeing as how she stepped down.
I voted for Biden, but fuck no he shouldn’t run again. Find a good fairly left leaning candidate who is 
-Pro bodily autonomy
-Neutral on the 2nd Amendment
-Loudly workers rights/pro middle class 
Obliterate the GOP. Literally just don’t talk shit about guns and harp on all the under-14 year old pregnancies and it’ll be a slaughter. That’s all it takes. >

I disagree on the first point, the GOP was utterly eviscerated compared to the norm in the midterms, and a lot of that was driven by abortion rights. Three important data points:


Pew polling in May had <20% of the country in favor of a total abortion ban with no exceptions. Which Republicans are going for.


Kansas a bit after Roe was overturned voted to keep abortion legal in a state referendum. It wasn't even close. 


I believe it was Kentucky during the midterms that also had a referendum? And again no question, keeping abortion legal handily won.


The debate comes on where it should be legal, not if it should be legal. When people in red states overwhelmingly vote to keep abortion legal, it's something to capitalize on. As an added bonus, it's also the right thing to do. 
Unless you mean defining when it should and shouldn't be legal, in which case I agree, not the time to do that. I'm all for a strong workers/middle class push, but I do think we should temper expectations.
Edit: For the record I also voted for Biden but I think he needs to let someone younger run. He should build up possible contenders and give them experience now for later. >

Agree, and aside from it being politically smart to back bodily autonomy when it comes to abortion rights, taking a neutral position is throwing women under the bus. >

Yeah, if the next democratic nominee took a neutral stance on bodily autonomy, I would officially stop making fun of the bozos who claim that "both sides are the same". I'm not voting for anyone who doesn't stand up for bodily autonomy as sacrosanct. >

Exactly. It's also such a stupid tactical decision. Quit pulling punches. Abortion and body autonomy are incredibly popular. Red state lunatics shouldn't be pandered to. >

The neutral tactic was for 2A. Which I'm for. I absolutely believe we need stronger gun laws (basic stuff, like background checks and carry permits), but running on a Beto-ish "We're gonna take your guns" platform is shooting your candidacy in the foot. Pun intended. At least that's the way I read that post. >

That's an interesting comment. For her to say this publicly is meaningful. It's the first real doubt cast on him running by a Dem. She also said there are other candidates who could beat Trump. That to me is a signal that many Dems are hoping Biden doesn't run, one of the first such signals I've seen. Perhaps the recent document scandal has changed things or it's just that they think their chances are higher with someone else. >

Absolutely, the 2020 election cycle proved there was a lot of talent in the party. Just without the same clout as Biden. >

I can't think of one dem who could beat a non-Trump Republican candidate. Mayor Pete (who is a talented politician) and Kamala (who is as compelling as dry toast) would lose by 100 electoral votes. Not sure who that leaves. >

Keep in mind, most people were not aware of Pete or Kamala before the last primaries. And then you have Obama, who had no national presence before his run. 
My point is that there are candidates out there that we haven't heard of, and Biden is going to have challengers that will emerge. >

He won’t have challengers. That’s the dumbest thing democrats can do this election cycle >

Yeah, I don’t see any Democratic contender compelling enough to give up incumbency. Obviously he’s ancient and shouldn’t run if he doesn’t think he can do it, but he surely would have the biggest advantage at the polls. >

It’s not even about giving up the seat — if Biden announces he doesn’t want to seek re-election, it will cause a ton of infighting … while the Republican Party can’t decide between Trump or DeSantis >

This "infighting" could also forge the best candidate.  Obama had a tough primary and wasn't well known, but he emerged as the nominee and won the election AND he was a poc from Chicago!  On paper, not great odds, but it worked in 2008. >

True, but I really think this election cycle for republicans is an anomaly. It’s something we have never seen before, but I’m willing to bet it’s either Trump (who has already announced his run) bullying people into not running or another Republican (most likely DeSantis) challenging him. Either way, I don’t think a Republican can win this election cycle >

From your reddit comment to God's eyes(?).  Complacency is deadly.  I was one of the disbelieving characters in the Chappell/SNL skit about 2016 election night.  In fact, as a white male in the south I said, Trump is a joke, Republicans fucked up this time.  Then Wednesday morning 😶 >

For most careers in the US, being past retirement age makes it very difficult to get and hold a job. Yet, our congress is filled with people past retirement age. 
Why are people that can't work at a desk in a regular job making laws for our country? >

One of my direct reports is turning 71 this year and retiring.
Thank fuck. 
I mean this the best way possible, he can’t do shit barely without some type of accommodation which makes sense but holy cow.
It’s an obvious decline in mental acuity. I’m not like “hey it’s _____ my super old engineer that forgets shit and yells at everyone”. >

Yet we still raise the retirement age past 65... >

For US millennials, retirement will likely be 67+ >

Full SSN retirement age for anyone born after 1960 is 67. That's Gen X, never mind millennials >

She's not wrong. I like Biden more than the last guy who had his job, but this country really doesn't need more octogenarians in office. 
We could afford to clean out most if not all of the ones we already have. >

Right. I'm a fan, he's been a good leader overall, avoiding wwiii and all. I like the fact he's put some younger and competent people into cabinet positions... We need more people that get that exposure and an opportunity to do great things.
But the country needs someone in their 40-50s..   enough government experience to be competent, but young enough to have empathy for modern issues. Less burdened with yesteryear. >

And under the average American lifespan >

Which, from what I heard, was 77 pre-Covid, 72 during Covid, and slowly increasing post-Covid >

I don't recall Pelosi saying anything at all about Diane Feinstein... >

Actually she did... endorsing her for reelection in 2018 when she was a spritely 84 years old. >

Precisely my point, then - Pelosi is a hypocrite when it comes to octogenarian politicians. >


Pelosi is a hypocrite

Doesn't make her wrong though. >

82 year old politician warns that 80 may be too old for politics. >

She better announce her retirement soon then, and her comment won’t be hypocritical. >

She is well on her way. She resigned as speaker of the house, I imagine she won't run for re-election. >

Well, if anyone would know it would be an 82 year old. >

There's absolutely no way...
And I even like Biden. But an 82 year old can't be an effective president...
He should be happily living out his life on a beach somewhere. >

They mean her. She is 82. >

Biden is 80 and it looks like Trump turns 77 this year. I don't think we should have a president or vice president over the age of 65. I do value the expertise and opinions of those over 65, but they should be in consultant positions.
I have coworkers who are well into their 60s and 70s, and while they are brilliant, they've lost some of their sharpness, and more than one has fallen asleep at their desk in the afternoons. ETA that another older coworker has vision issues in low light, and has backed into more than one car in our parking garage. 
Another coworker is already drawing a pension from a previous job, but doesn't want to retire because he's divorced and his children are grown. He does not know how to use most of our software and is reluctant to communicate via text. Also adding that none of my older coworkers want to develop documentation or training resources for when they retire. >

I fell asleep at m desk in my 20s so I am ahead of the curve. >

Ha I slept through high school and I occasionally fall asleep while drinking my coffee in Starbucks parking lot lol >

I take naps right after drinking coffee more often than I care to admit >

You may have ADHD! Stimulants can make us sleepy. Adderal works like a sleeping pill for me. >

I think it would be wise for dems to shut up about Biden until they have a clearly better candidate. This is like throwing away your old shoes before you have new ones. >

It’s like people already forgot what a shit show the Democratic primaries were. >

You mean when the progressive candidate with overwhelming youth support was winning? So every DNC candidate except Biden dropped out to endorse Biden ahead of Super Tuesday? Even though it makes no electoral sense to do so because less than 20% of total votes were cast across 4 states?
Turns out running a 70+ candidate is still not enough for the neolibs if your geriatric candidate believes in horrible things like HEALTHCARE and  AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD WEALTH. >

People are making a lot of leaps. All she said was that age isn’t going to help him in an election, she didn’t say she thinks he’s demented. She didn’t even say she thinks he shouldn’t run. >

It's a simple enough statement to understand, but the discussion should be about why she chose to say it. >

The best thing is that she said it out loud, sending the signal to those who want to run, to get the wheels turning. Very sly but hopefully effective messaging to a Biden challenger. >

With the Republicans in the House getting ready to investigate his family for breathing, and the slow trickle of classified documents that keeps turning up when they should have been returned what? 6 YEARS ago?   
He should take the wins that he has had, and do the best thing for the party, step aside and let Kamala take over.  Why is that what's best for the party? As of 4 days ago if she takes over it does NOT count as her first term. So she would get the benefit of running as the incumbent,  and if she won both elections she could be in the office for a total of 10 years. Plus having the first woman president would piss off Republicans. >

I’m all for a woman president, however I don’t think Kamala is a good pick.. she’s had multiple chances to step up and show she’s got what it takes, and yet all she does is sit in the background. >

That is cause you don’t pay attention… she does a lot of diplomacy. If you lack interest in international issues, you’re not going to see what Kamala is doing. >

You definitely have a point! I can’t follow everything.. Although I think others will share my opinion, and if Kamala runs she will need to work on this to secure votes. >

Biden is old. Trump is old. If they go head to head again, I think Biden wins because most of America does not want to see Trump in office.
But if Biden ran against a 50 year old Republican, I think the contrast would prove disastrous for Biden. He's old. He seems tired. He's had a good presidency, but I don't think resume is good enough anymore.
That said, I can't think of one Dem who can beat a non-Trump republican. Maybe Whitmer? I think Josh Shapiro would be a good candidate in 2028. >

Reagan won against a much younger opponent too.
And you can easily say that if Biden ran against some generic, centrist Republican like Larry Hogan or something, there is a decent chance he’d lose.
The problem is, a generic centrist Republican is very unlikely to win the primary in today’s Republican Party >

The media will hit Democrats for admitting Biden’s age is not ideal.
But won’t hit Republicans for confidently declaring Trump one of the greatest political minds of the modern era… >

Look, he has to keep saying he’s running or otherwise he becomes a lame duck. Obviously he’s gonna wait to the last possible minute to announce if he’s running. Anything before that is just speculation. >

He's not, but who do the Dems have otherwise? Even with record turn out Biden only won by tens of thousands of votes across 3 states - basically the same as 2016 except that time it went Trump's way. The old establishment guard in the Democratic Party needs to step aside and stop with this bulls*it where younger people need the permission of octogenarians or nonagenarians to run. >

As a old lib Texas filly,. I would love to see Gretchen W or Gavin n jmo >

Newsom prob would trigger some rural voters, but Whitmer seems like she’d have a good chance. What are the disadvantages in her case? >

Jmo, at my age, my old eyes have seen disadvantages to all political players lol 
Yes, I laughed. 
On a serious, I've watched her over the years. Something about her, she has balls of steel like that of the late  Ann Richards. Once dem gov of Texas.  Jmo
Im slowly wanting to know more about her. >

Between age & now getting caught in the document trap, he should just bow out. He's done some good work, could be better, but its not a bad legacy to have. >

Pass the torch,  please. >

Tammy Duckworth 2024! >

Age isn't a positive thing for the majority of elected officials. >

I don’t know who can beat Trump but nobody over 65 years of age should hold public office sorry just realize your role is to teach the next generation not be making decisions for it … the fact that I have to say this is sad but a person has to know their limitations >

Oh God no. We need someone new, Biden made it because he wasn't Trump. We need someone  younger, with passion and drive. >

Would Hakeem Jeffries have a chance? I really liked his speech and his positivity! >

He's staying in the House. Dude has a lot more influence and power as the head of House Democrats for the foreseeable future than running for an office with a fixed expiration date. >

She needs to have a word with her fellow cronette Diane Feinstein. >

I don't really want him to run again, but I can't think of anyone else who has a chance of beating Trump and/or DeSantis.  I'd love to see Bernie get a shot, but he's old af too. >

Bernie has spent how many decades losing the Dem nomination?  If he can't even get enough Dem support, I'm not sure why people keep thinking he'll be able to rally anyone else to vote for him. >

The difference is Bernie has popular support, whereas Biden has the support of the party apparatus >

Which is what matters.  The "why" of him losing is so secondary to reality.  Hillary, whomever, understand the reality of winning and have aligned themselves with the party, donors, media, etc. to give them the best chance.
If Bernie cannot do that - cannot rally the party and cannot rally the donors - then he needs a massive groundswell that cannot be denied.  Which he also has been unable to do. >

He might not be able to win. But he certainly has helped shift the overton window on many issues and spread awareness on others. His influence is tantamount. >

How many delegates vote in the ideas primary?
This is just copium for a guy who for soundly rejected twice >

Did you happen to miss the part where I said myself that he "might not win"? My point is that he still has a role to play, whether popularizing crucial issues (which he succeeded at), debating candidates that may win to reveal who they really are, or in a best case, being a VP for a new young candidate. >

Geriatrics need to make room for younger generations. Exhibit #1: Diana Feinstein is old af and has dementia. They need to pass the torch and know when it’s time to retire. >

Wonder what she thinks of fellow Californian Diane Feinstein wandering around the Capitol not knowing her own name? >

Pelosi will probably endorse Porter over Feinstein. Going by the Kennedy vs Ed Markey Primary, Pelosi seems to support house challengers over senate incumbents. >

At this point it’s embarrassing her family has not saved her from herself. >

Replacing Biden right now would be a terrible mistake for Dems, especially considering the impressive midterm performance the Dems put up, and the impressive amount of legislation that was passed in the first two years of Biden's tenure
Imo the nomination is Biden's if Biden wants it. And he will have the benefit of incumbency advantage against any nominee the Republicans put up, unlike any new wildcard nominee >

And as much as I want to see new faces, Biden, like Obama, was able to turn out black voters. Thats the key to winning. I don’t know who else can >

You actually get it.
I would say that Midwestern governors like Gretchen Whitmer and Doug Shapiro are underrated though. Raphael Warnock seems like a strong candidate to me too. But Dems would be making a fatal mistake if they nominated anyone besides Biden in 2024 imo.
I do think that one underrated factor here is the 'boring' vibes that Biden gives off, which allows the Dems to pass consequential legislation without inspiring much negative polarization... no matter how hard the GOP tries, they can never successfully portray him as a radical leftist the way they could for Bill Clinton and Obama >

If those midwestern governors can turn out the Obama coalition and keep the blue wall, thats game. Whitmer probably had a better shot at doing that. 
But honestly, Biden just has to “Do no harm”, continue decreasing inflation, avoid recession, keep talking about infrastructure, he can win. >

I agree with this. The Senate looks like it's going to go into Republican hands in 2024 though. But if the Democrats capture the House again (which they have a good chance to, considering the small margin the Republicans have), we will have a Democratic House and a Republican Senate in 2024.
Which might seem bad, but I am a lot more optimistic about legislation being passed in a Democratic House and a Republican Senate... than I am about legislation being passed in a Republican House and a Democratic Senate. It seems to me that Republican senators are less extremist than their colleagues in the House >

I was on board with Biden running again just because, who else? Newsom is the only option I like. We just don’t have any strong progressive candidate that can pull in independents and moderates.
But now, after this thing with the documents, even though it’s not a big deal, they’re going to pound him around election time with it and people are going to go “he’s just as corrupt as Trump!” >

Obama basically came out of obscurity. No reason there isn't someone else who could do the same and not have all the Dem baggage holding them down. >

Obama was an Illinois state senator and a Senator in Washington.
Prior to that, he was a community organizer, president of the Harvard Law Review and a professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago.
I’m not even aware of anybody obscure that has those kinds of qualifications + the charisma.
Katie Porter maybe? But I don’t know if she’s quite ready yet. >

But she'll defend the dementia-ridden Feinstein in her efforts to seek reelection to the Senate in the same breath.
Legitimately curious as to why she's making this statement. Usually birds of a feather* flock together, but for Pelosi, an aging dinosaur herself, to make these comments, something must be stirring behind the scenes. >

Also interesting how she says this just after she gives up the gavel >

Ugh. Major media, sorry not sorry that Biden is doing a quality job with a sane and adult professional manner, that is less interesting and generates less clicks than Trump's clown shithouse on fire. So that this and the current temporary pearl-clutching about documents his lawyers voluntarily returned are literally all you have to try and foment clickbait about.
But Biden is absolutely running again in 2024, and furthermore he'll win. >

Prior to last weekend I’d agree with you. But Is it still pearl clutching after it took an FBI search to find yet again more classified documents including some dating back to his Senate days? Docs his lawyers missed when they searched his home. This will absolutely hurt his 2024 run unless the special counsel speeds up the investigation and announces he did nothing wrong. Until then I hope some other democrats consider running as well so we have options for the primary. >

It was a search by the DOJ that were invited there, not an FBI raid. That is the key difference. >

They’re working hard not to run him. Who do the Dems want though? >

If Trump wins the nom, Biden will run. >

Tammy Duckworth! She’s a veteran and has done a lot for vets, so I’d love to see her run! >

He genuinely should be barred from running for office at that age.... No reason for an 80-year-old to run the country. >

Old people running this country is what has this shit show going, not saying the young are better but at least there not out of touch with how society has changed and how much the internet connects us, which good be a good thing.