We need to challenge them in every fucking state.
I don’t see what the big deal is about a primary challenge. Every Congressional seat should have a primary challenger. If nothing else it teaches the next generation how to run campaigns.
The AOC method. If they have a good record and actually care, like Bernie, (doubtful there are many), sure, leave them, otherwise, AOC them.
Ron Wyden is one of the best in the Senate and has been a long time privacy advocate.
If he really is one of the best, he should have no problem winning a primary.
Voters in most states believe their guys are “some of the best” which is why we all keep sending the same folks back decade over decade (it’ll be Wyden’s 45th year in Congress coming up!) The folks who keep voting them in love their Reps and Senators, because each promises they aren’t like the others, and are there to represent the common people amongst all the other Washington insiders.
To be clear, I think in Oregon we basically hit the jackpot each year with our elected officials, we do have some of the very best. But I’m also clear-eyed about the fact that people who vote for politicians I find to be repugnant idiots doing all they can to destroy the potential of America feel the exact same way about their guys that I feel about mine. No one needs 6 terms in the Senate, no matter how much I like them.
People keep voting for Mitch McConnell, Susan Collins, and Ron Johnson on repeat, to name a few turds who have made headlines.
Perhaps with a wave of young challengers we can finally get what the US deserves, a true left.
A resurgence of the US socialist/leftist movements (not unlike in the early-mid 20th century) would do this country a desperately needed good.
Like they have in China and North Korea?
Authoritarian socialism doesn’t have an exclusive claim to leftism (contrary to tankie claims). Leftism & socialism can & probably should be nonauthoritarian & even liberal: power imbalance is a serious inequality.
Also just gonna piggy back by pointing out that even just socialism predates the ideological branch that China and the Norks derive from. Just off the top of my head you have communalism (Anabaptist and the Shakers being decent examples), utopianism, leftist libertarians, and whatever the fuck the early rednecks were doing (the Scottish strikers not their Appalachian descendants).
Also that association is great propaganda for conservatives.
Is 40 what we consider a young politician now?
When some politicians predate NASA and the US Air Force yeah it kinda is.
Anyone under 50 certainly is a young politician for me.
Under 75 is pretty young these days. The boomer control of congress has been too long. We need more people born after the 1950’s at the very least.
As long as they’re not corrupt corporate ghouls.
Make it so
I just find it so weird that people seem to be buying into this intergenerational warfare and the assumption that somehow younger candidates are just better by default.
It feels like I’ve heard this one before…I’m Gen X and if you watch a lot of the output about and by the boomers, there were similar narratives about how they were going to fix all the problems caused by The Man. For my generation, I heard a lot of similar sentiments from and about people my age. I still have not seen a whole lot of evidence for positive change, other than social issues. That’s not nothing, I guess, but…for fiscal ones, it seems remarkably worse.
The intergenerational warfare seems to be a media push to distract from the corruption that’s draining the people’s coffers and life force.
Maybe I’m fortunate in my bubble but folks in my close circle don’t actually believe those narratives. Hopefully that’s largely the case and internet hubbub is exaggerated.
Yeah, I notice the same thing IRL - most people (except for the very young and rather naive) don’t tend to fall for what seems to be a rather obvious ploy to further atomize and divide.
But online, holy cow, I seem to see a whole lot of alleged progressives that seem to be deeply engaged in lots and lots of discussions involving identity and intersectional this or that and lecturing on language (see as an example, “the r word”), but then be apparently very okay with dunking on “boomers” and seemingly being more preoccupied with the age of someone like Biden or Nancy or Taco or Schumer, etc., vs. things of actual substance…
I’ve said it a lot here, but this kind of thing is going to age like fine wine if/when breakthroughs in life extension/age reversal come online. I cannot believe how backward and regressive a lot of these positions are, but apparently this kind of thing is one of the last areas where it is perfectly fine to show bigotry (while in so many areas and corners of the 'net, the progressives love to play the Oppression Olympics) and it’s rather concerning to see supposed progressives espousing it all over the place.
