2020 Democratic Challengers

[unofan]

If the usual suspects win in 2018, the House Dem leadership will be pushing 80.

I don't think the Founders envisioned the House as a place of lifetime employment.

Oh sure they did. They could've easily put term limits into the Constitution and chose not to. The founding fathers were the ruling elite, they **** well wanted to stay that way for life.

[The Sicatoka]

Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers

... were the ruling elite, they **** well wanted to stay that way for life.

So, knowing that, why don't "We the People" implement term limits today (see: Article V).

[E.J. Smith]

Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers

If the usual suspects win in 2018, the House Dem leadership will be pushing 80.

I don't think the Founders envisioned the House as a place of lifetime employment.

Pretty sure they didn't envision the 2nd Amendment protecting the right to own an assault rifle either. Or the 1st protecting the free speech rights of corporations.

[E.J. Smith]

Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers

So, knowing that, why don't "We the People" implement term limits today (see: Article V).

Don't We the People directly weigh in on that in every single election? Seems odd to indirectly stop ourselves from doing something that we do directly almost every chance we get.

The unintended consequence of terms limits is going to be a steady stream of new guys with their hands out trying to get theirs in the short time they've got in office. I actually want more people at the end of their lives who see less value in money, power, status and see things as more of their last chance to actually do something right - see John McCain finally walking all of the maverick talking he's done over his Senate career.

[SJHovey]

Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers

Or the 1st protecting the free speech rights of corporations.

I don't think they'd be opposed to free speech rights of corporations. At least I hope not. The idea that anyone in this country would argue against the free speech rights of anyone, or anything, is appalling to me. BUT THE MONEYEEZ!?!?!

Sorry, free speech isn't based upon how much or how little money someone or some thing has to spend on it. Furthermore, it's only speech. It's simply the free expression of an idea or opinion. No one is forcing you to listen to it or believe it.

[Rover]

Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers

A few thoughts:

1) Term limits is a dumb idea. As we all learned the hard way in 2016, there's no substitute for actually participating in the election from Prez all the way down to dogcatcher.

2) Nancy Pelosi is the least to blame for the Dems current predicament as she got Obama's agenda passed as Speaker, which was her job, as well as she isn't a child molester (Hastert), a drunk (Boner) or granny starver (Ryan). Having said that I think the next congress win or lose she should pass the baton to someone else. She's been Dem house leader for like 15 years I think. That might be longer than Tip O'Neil spent as the top Dem.

3) If Trump keeps going the way he's been going, I wouldn't worry about finding enough Dems to run for Prez next time around regardless of age. How effective those people will be is another question...

[joecct]

I don't think they'd be opposed to free speech rights of corporations. At least I hope not. The idea that anyone in this country would argue against the free speech rights of anyone, or anything, is appalling to me. BUT THE MONEYEEZ!?!?!

Sorry, free speech isn't based upon how much or how little money someone or some thing has to spend on it. Furthermore, it's only speech. It's simply the free expression of an idea or opinion. No one is forcing you to listen to it or believe it.

It's not us. It is our political masters who listen and believe when the money flows.

A corporation can spend all they want in the media to influence opinion. Buying an elected official is different -whether it is Monsanto or George Soros.

Maybe we need to go the way of the Mother Country and limit the election season and have free radio/TV for all candidates with a limit per day.

[Kepler]

Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers

Not really. "If no one steps up" sounds like "if Hillary somehow gets the DNC to clear the tables for her again". He's hoping someone younger than 70 with any kind of charisma runs.

There will be no shortage of Democratic candidates. Not only will we have everybody who thinks Dump is a rotten stump they can kick in, we'll also have everybody who stayed away in '16 because they believed the nomination had already been awarded.

[joecct]

There will be no shortage of Democratic candidates. Not only will we have everybody who thinks Dump is a rotten stump they can kick in, we'll also have everybody who stayed away in '16 because they believed the nomination had already been awarded.

Who under 60? Heck, find 70.
Manchin is 70.
Biden is 70++
Downtown Jerry Brown is 79.
Liz is 68!!!!

[The Sicatoka]

Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers

There will be no shortage of Democratic candidates. Not only will we have everybody who thinks Dump is a rotten stump they can kick in, we'll also have everybody who stayed away in '16 because they believed the nomination had already been awarded.

Seems there'll be some serious sifting and winnowing to be done.

[Rover]

Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers

Who under 60? Heck, find 70.
Manchin is 70.
Biden is 70++
Downtown Jerry Brown is 79.
Liz is 68!!!!

Cuomo is around 60? maybe. Believe Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown is in his early 60's. Booker and Gillenbrand might still be in their 40's.

Mind you, Trump will be 74 next time around.

[The Sicatoka]

Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers

Who under 60? Heck, find 70.
Manchin is 70.
Biden is 70++
Downtown Jerry Brown is 79.
Liz is 68!!!!

The SNL skit calling Warren "hot young thing" really drove the age of the D leadership home.

"Mouth breathers from Wisconsin" rejoice! The Ds haven't forgotten you.

[E.J. Smith]

Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers

I don't think they'd be opposed to free speech rights of corporations. At least I hope not. The idea that anyone in this country would argue against the free speech rights of anyone, or anything, is appalling to me. BUT THE MONEYEEZ!?!?!

Sorry, free speech isn't based upon how much or how little money someone or some thing has to spend on it. Furthermore, it's only speech. It's simply the free expression of an idea or opinion. No one is forcing you to listen to it or believe it.

You lose me, and your argument, when you have to throw in the anything and the some thing. Utterly ludicrous. Are you going to tell us next that corporations should be allowed to vote in elections. People can vote in elections, corporations are people, should every corporation have a vote?

Plus "BUT THE MONEYEEZ" nice ham handed false equivalency - and Republicans wonder why anyone with a brain thinks they're morons.

[mookie1995]

Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers

Cuomo is around 60? maybe. Believe Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown is in his early 60's. Booker and Gillenbrand might still be in their 40's.

Mind you, Trump will be 74 next time around.

hillary will be how old when she is sworn in??

[The Sicatoka]

Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers

People can vote in elections, corporations are people, should every corporation have a vote?

People are a legal entity with certain rights; corporations are a legal entity with certain rights. People and corporations do not have the same rights, but they each have rights and obligations under the law.

Like I posited a scenario in the taxes thread, if you want to take away speech right of a corporation, that's fundamental, and in that case I'd argue the tax code should be set up that corporations would no longer be taxable either. (It'd move them away from posturing to manipulate tax code so they wouldn't need speech rights. That said, please keep tax code conversations over there however.)