Page 8 of 8

Re: Defining the 21st Century Democratic Party

Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2024 2:14 am
by Victoria Raverna
Hayes: Madness. Democrats still aren’t taking the age issue seriously.


Re: Defining the 21st Century Democratic Party

Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2024 10:07 am
by Holman
Kraken wrote: Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:25 pm Rank and seniority matter. If this fellow waited 15+ years for his turn AND he now has cancer, maybe he deserves to grab the brass ring at last. (I'm assuming that he's qualified to do the job.) If he's near the end of his career and/or life, it will open up again in due time.
Maybe rank and seniority matter too much. The question is whether he is genuinely the best person available for the job.

I'm not optimistic that time is a luxury we have.

Re: Defining the 21st Century Democratic Party

Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2024 11:34 am
by Smoove_B
Kraken wrote: Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:25 pm Rank and seniority matter. If this fellow waited 15+ years for his turn AND he now has cancer, maybe he deserves to grab the brass ring at last. (I'm assuming that he's qualified to do the job.) If he's near the end of his career and/or life, it will open up again in due time.
If I didn't know how old you are, I'd be able to tell from your post here. :)

Every workplace I've ever endured has been filled with Boomers that refuse to step aside or allow anyone else to hold any type of power. If by some reason it happens, they're quite salty about it because there's a belief that person didn't "earn" it by putting in the time. Maybe it's something that tilts heavy towards the public sector, but it's tiresome. AOC is whip-smart, she has a connection with a younger generation of voters and she's clearly demonstrated political savvy. But she's also tapped into "scary" ideas that are against the establishment so she can't be "rewarded" with any type of political power within the party - not when we have norms to maintain!

It's gross.

Re: Defining the 21st Century Democratic Party

Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2024 11:42 am
by Zarathud
It’s an internal popularity contest. That’s always gross.

Re: Defining the 21st Century Democratic Party

Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2024 11:52 am
by Smoove_B
Zarathud wrote: Thu Dec 19, 2024 11:42 am It’s an internal popularity contest. That’s always gross.
It absolutely is. I am not sure I've heard anyone speak anything about Connolly ever. But I guess he's been there long enough that he knows "the rules" and won't rock the boat, so let's make sure he's in charge.

I guess his claim to fame is co-sponsoring a large bill in (checks notes) 2013 related to how the government purchases technology. I don't want to sound like I'm diminishing that, but that was a lifetime ago (politically).

To be clear, there's nothing in his Wiki page that's concerning; he seems to vote in a way that largely aligns with the current issues of concern and is arguably rather progressive. The issue is one of optics - specifically that he has zero connection to the current generation of voters that is spiraling because no one is listening to them. For the party to ignore the impact/connection AOC has with a rather large bloc of voters is penny-wise and pound foolish, imho.

Re: Defining the 21st Century Democratic Party

Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2024 3:48 am
by Kraken
Smoove_B wrote: Thu Dec 19, 2024 11:34 am
Kraken wrote: Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:25 pm Rank and seniority matter. If this fellow waited 15+ years for his turn AND he now has cancer, maybe he deserves to grab the brass ring at last. (I'm assuming that he's qualified to do the job.) If he's near the end of his career and/or life, it will open up again in due time.
If I didn't know how old you are, I'd be able to tell from your post here. :)

Every workplace I've ever endured has been filled with Boomers that refuse to step aside or allow anyone else to hold any type of power.
Shut up or move to the back of the line, whippersnapper. You aren't ready yet.

Re: Defining the 21st Century Democratic Party

Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2024 1:06 pm
by Unagi
Smoove_B wrote: Thu Dec 19, 2024 11:34 am
Kraken wrote: Wed Dec 18, 2024 10:25 pm Rank and seniority matter. If this fellow waited 15+ years for his turn AND he now has cancer, maybe he deserves to grab the brass ring at last. (I'm assuming that he's qualified to do the job.) If he's near the end of his career and/or life, it will open up again in due time.
If I didn't know how old you are, I'd be able to tell from your post here. :)

Every workplace I've ever endured has been filled with Boomers that refuse to step aside or allow anyone else to hold any type of power. If by some reason it happens, they're quite salty about it because there's a belief that person didn't "earn" it by putting in the time. Maybe it's something that tilts heavy towards the public sector, but it's tiresome. AOC is whip-smart, she has a connection with a younger generation of voters and she's clearly demonstrated political savvy. But she's also tapped into "scary" ideas that are against the establishment so she can't be "rewarded" with any type of political power within the party - not when we have norms to maintain!

It's gross.
It's also totally dysfunctional - which is all that ultimately matters.

Re: Defining the 21st Century Democratic Party

Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2024 1:26 pm
by LordMortis
They faked it until they made it and they are loath to let it go because they have nowhere else to turn. They aren't alone in that. We'll have our share of protective authority Xers who don't know where to turn because they aren't prepared to let go and they put in their time but can't retire as they approach their 60s coming very soon... Like now... Cranky "Only so and so will remember..." "remember when..." "we got by with..." stuff.

I mean I feel like I put in my time and stepped aside an do feel entitled to what I've set up, which includes things like gub'ment benefits I contributed money to for my entire life, even if that's not how pay as you go gub'ment works.