But should older people not have voices on who serves? You certainly implied that. If not directly stated that.
4 Likes
I don’t know exactly where you drew that implication. Assuming that’s a good faith question, my answer is that I think there’s a big fundamental difference between saying “ranking committee members should get the position by default” (which is a system that some Congressmembers are actually on the record supporting) vs. saying “older people should not have a voice in who serves” which I have not heard anyone argue for.
3 Likes
“Connolly, 74, defeated 35-year-old Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in a 131-84 vote to become the ranking member of the powerful committee.“
I disagreed with supporting the other candidate in this race. But it was a vote. Why do you think Pelosi shouldn’t have a voice here?
3 Likes
It was a vote, and she certainly had as much right as any other member of Congress to vote how she wished, but given her past leadership role her influence went well beyond that. She wasn’t just “a voice” but probably the loudest, most influential voice. Reporting was that she lobbied vigorously for Connolly. Which, yes, she also had a right to do.
What I was mainly disagreeing with was the premise behind your statement
because someone like Connolly wasn’t “developed” as a replacement, he literally got the job because he’d been sitting on that committee the longest. Clyburn is another name you mentioned and another Congressmember who explicitly endorses the seniority system for determining committee chairs.
2 Likes
So - you object to others valuing her opinion.
And disagree that serving on that committee is preparation for leadership.
Okay.
3 Likes
The controversy over the DNC election is a perfect example of media bias, the Democratic Party’s white problem and why everyone hates DEI
The Democrats’ new, young, diverse leadership team signaled a change from old-head Democratic power brokers like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. However, during a recent appearance on HBO’s Real Time With Bill Maher, Hogg angered many Black Democratic voters.
Apparently intoxicated from inhaling white, liberal, know-it-all secondhand smugness from Bill Maher, Hogg mentioned a few Democrats who need to “get over themselves” and retire from public service.
How is that racist? He didn’t even say anything about Clyburn!No one said it was racist, but everyone knew he was talking about Clyburn.
A few days earlier, the South Carolina congressman told the Wall Street Journal: “Nancy left her seat. Steny left his seat. I left my seat. What the hell I’m supposed to do now? What do you want— me to give up my life?”
To Democrats who wear Daisy Dukes in front of their grandmothers and call their parents by their first names, Hogg’s outspokenness is just what the party needs. And, to be fair, many Black Democrats agree with the substance of Hogg’s argument — that the Democratic Party needs newer, younger leaders. But whether it is staying in “a child’s place” or engaging in “grown folks’ business,” there is one universal rule in the Black diaspora:
“Respect your elders.” — Raheem’s Rules of OrderEven Bakari Sellers (who was elected to the S.C. legislature when he was 22 years old) tweeted that Hogg throwing shade at an 84-year-old Black man was a little disrespectful.
7 Likes
I posted that above. 
6 Likes
Their own damned party going around and talking like this doesn’t help.
My mom, who votes dem and always has since like Carter, believed it. Like fully.
It’s not just “young progressives.”
These particular alleged leaks are always bad if it is true but worse if it isn’t.
I really don’t believe it and think it’s probably the worst kind of sign that this is the way younger people are going in this party even if they are only trying to beat old guard at the primaries.
…
Using that list I’m going to add some context from a regular persons POV on the one of these people I really know a little about.
Lloyd Doggett’s seat would affect me (but I can’t vote for it because of Gerrymandering). Because of that though I have at least a little memory of his run.
I’m going to tell you right now one of the problems is that he absolutely came across as the only electable seeming candidate in the primaries to most people.
I… like look for info on these people almost as a full hobby at this point and try to do it in time to tell anyone else what I find. Because most people outside of a very politically motivated set of friends… just don’t have time or energy. You may think they are lazy but they are not.
Good information on a boring local election is so hard to find it often takes me at least three or four “days” of spending a couple hours or more literally looking for them, scanning for context and trying to understand something besides judging their smiles and boilerplate. Otherwise I have to like pay a lot of money to try to hang out with the right people to meet them because, unsurprisingly, they are campaigning with rich people and looking for money.
Doggett was the only one with any experience in this kind of role at all that I knew of and the only one who even had a voting record to look at. People are scared and the more scared they get the less “but I’m new and just graduated and volunteered for a business think tank last year” gets the votes. And that’s what some people ran in this very primary with.
There was one guy who maybe looked promising, no experience, but he said the right vague platitudes on his website but he was running against some one whose literal only negative quality as a candidate is that he is 70… and many of these voters are also 70… also that is ageism.
The other side of this thirst for new blood is that HERE, I shit you not I think it’s the TGOP that does this, but there’s always some fucking people running as Dems who are complete utter saboteurs. And they often run on these shallow bumper sticker campaigns and bill their lack of experience or long term outsider status as being a positive. This is NOT a persuasive argument.
This is a big famous city in an openly hostile state and there’s big money decisions involved every step of the way.
It’s something the city has unfortunately had to live with. All cities probably.
It occurs to me that local politics has grown to financial scale here as it needs to COMPETE with modern digital ad campaigns and protest movements also. You need to reach millions of people in a dense city to win your seat.
So billions and billions it might take to get a good kid in the eyes of some one like me.
Fuck the more I think the more I spiral.
Because we are losing the things that matter to things that really shouldn’t ever be made to matter to us. They are easier to advertise though.
7 Likes
What does this mean?
9 Likes
Yep, an article so nice we posted it twice!
I posted it with an excerpt so busy others wouldn’t need to click through (or maybe would more want to click through!). 
9 Likes
Neither hits for me either. I read it though as “in other words, white rural voters.”
I gather that Daisy Dukes are very short jeans shorts:
7 Likes
Daisy Dukes are short shorts, or that’s what kids called them when I was in middle school. I’m over 40 now. Do kids still call them that? I wouldn’t know.
6 Likes
I like Malcolm in that:
7 Likes
But, but, but (or butt, butt, butt, if you prefer), what does that have to do with calling their parents by their first names, which implies crunchy granola families?
6 Likes
Yeah I know what Daisy Dukes are. I just can’t figure out what that sentence means.
11 Likes
I think they are talking about “Them young kids who dress immodestly and sass their parents”, but described in a tongue-in-cheek way that is supposed to read as not explicitly divisive (while still clearly judging the population in question for their perceived brashness).
11 Likes
Sorry but I can’t parse it. I realized on another read that I had misunderstood it anyway.
So I’m with you on that.
9 Likes
I believe he’s calling them disrespectful.
11 Likes
