381

number of Republican figures, including Donald Trump MAGA loyalists, have called on Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to resign amid concerns about his health.

(Less cancerous link: https://archive.ph/QMkMM)

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Rand@lemmy.world 95 points 1 year ago

Need to get these old ghouls out of office and set maximum age limits for all positions of government

[-] Nougat@kbin.social 38 points 1 year ago

I think it's clear that people can be disconnected from reality no matter how old they are, and that older people are not excluded from being insightful and valuable to the political process (think Bernie Sanders and Robert Reich).

It's easy to feel like elminating older people from politics is a solution, but it's not. Voting for good people who actually represent your interests and the interests of your community is a better solution, but that's harder to think about.

[-] lynny@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

You can't vote people into office who are younger when your only viable choices are people who are all over the age of 65.

[-] Aimhere@midwest.social 22 points 1 year ago

Maybe, but Kentuckians have been voting against their own best interests for years.

[-] Radioaktvt@lemmy.one 15 points 1 year ago

Sounds like Kentuckians like to suffer. I say this as a Texan and my fellow Texans love to suffer and constantly vote against their own best interests.

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

Kentucky is inflicting their suffering on everyone else though, since McConnell was the reason for the shift in scotus by denying and then rushing appointments through the Senate.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Nougat@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

... that's harder to think about.

[-] Iwasondigg@lemmy.one 15 points 1 year ago

I would agree with you if it wasn't for the fact that there is also a minimum age for office. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If a grown adult is considered too young to serve then these geriatric ghouls are too old in my opinion.

[-] Nougat@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Minimum for president is 35, senate is 30, house is 25. For one, I think those ages are "sufficiently youthful" to be generally representative of current modern concerns, all other things aside. They could easily be some years younger, possibly eliminated entirely, on the same basis as there is not a current upper age limit: let people be elected on their individual merits, and not exclude people on the basis of age.

I agree that there being a minimum age limit without an upper limit is contradictory, but a better solution would be to lower or eliminate the minimum. Perhaps some other kind of metric could be employed in place of a minimum age limit for federal office, like "having served as an elected official at the State level for two years."

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I'd be okay requiring someone to serve as an elected official prior to serving in the House or Senate. Hell, I'd probably support mandatory public service for most if not all people for a period of time.

[-] pup_atlas@pawb.social 2 points 1 year ago

Logically, if you’re a candidate from any party, that knows they won’t be around in a decade’s time, what incentive, responsibility, or obligation do you REALLY have to do what’s best for ALL citizens— Including those who’ll be around for a few more decades. Especially regarding decisions with society-changing implications that’ll impact generations of change. It’s such a staggering conflict of interest that it’s not reasonable to expect any politician to set it aside.

That is even setting aside the obvious statistical likelihood that people over the age of 65 are significantly more likely to contract ailments that will impair their judgement and therefore their ability to do their job like Alzheimers (the exact same parroted reason for the minimum age requirement, that young people’s brains are not fully developed, and therefore are not able to perform the job adequately). If we’re going to arbitrarily set a minimum, we should be obligated to set a maximum.

[-] kool_newt@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Great, they can be advisors or join think tanks or other organizations. Robert Reich has no power. I'm a huge Bernie fan but even I think he's too old.

[-] UltraMagnus0001@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Cognitive tests would be great. THANKS!

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

Too ripe for abuse by whoever sets the standard.

[-] Nougat@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Even that can be fraught with danger. Who creates, administers, judges those tests? We already see bias issues in standardized testing for students.

[-] Drusas@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

There are already such tests and they were created by neurologists and backed by studies.

[-] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

"Literacy" tests from the Jim Crow era South have very clearly demonstrated why these are not a good idea.

[-] Stoneykins@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

Those were for voting, not candidacy, AFAIK. Not that candidicy would have been any more fair then...

[-] Kingofthezyx@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Maximum Age at election = median life expectancy

If you want to serve longer, make people's lives better.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

My suggestion in another thread was if it's 18 years after birth to vote then it should be 18 years before average lifespan to lose the right to vote.

[-] itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml 58 points 1 year ago

these crusty old farts need to retire. their dumbass voters keep reelecting them so it looks like it will take retirement or death to get rid of them.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] Acronymesis@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago

After telling a friend of mine about the Mitch McConnell incident yesterday, and he replied, “Him and (Diane) Feinstein gonna get a little cabin together and just see out their years on the porch?

This gave me an idea. I had my other buddy who frequents Midjourney prompt it with “Mitch McConnell and Dianne Feinstein sitting on a cabin porch on a couple of rocking chairs staring out into the sunset”

The result? Perfection.

[-] BroBot9000@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago

That’s too nice of an ending for that toxic turtle asshole.

He’s made the lives of many people fucking miserable and doesn’t deserve a sunset ending.

[-] asteriskeverything@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

And Diane is hindering actual progress being made holding a seat she doesn't even do the work for. More accurate if they were sitting there with the world on fire not a lovely sunset.

[-] Acronymesis@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I certainly don’t disagree. It’s more imagery of wishful thinking that they would fuck off into the sunset than anything. 😞

[-] BroBot9000@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah, I understand.

I wish they’d fuck off into the centre of the sun as well.

[-] Shialac@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

That fuck doesn't deserve a decent retirement

[-] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Oh you did not, lol. 😭

[-] aaron_griffin@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago

I hope he shit his pants in that moment.

[-] foggy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

That's what I've been thinking, too.

I just hope the guy that stepped in to help is scarred by the stench.

[-] Ertebolle@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago

Before anyone gets too excited: while Kentucky does have a Democratic governor, under (recently amended) state law, if McConnell's seat goes vacant, the governor doesn't get to pick his replacement but only gets to choose from a list of 3 candidates submitted by the state GOP.

[-] sci@feddit.nl 11 points 1 year ago

The US is truly the bastion of democracy

[-] Captainvaqina@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Incredible out in the open fascism from the Kentucky GOP when they amended that law. Just like desatan and him changing the governorship law so he could fail at a presidential run.

Just flat out steamrolling democracy. Enemies of the people.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] thesprongler@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

And for anyone thinking this is a partisan issue, it's not.

[-] Acronymesis@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

EXACTLY. Diane Feinstein is in the same damn boat. Both her and Mitch could have fucked off into the sunset with plenty of retirement money YEARS ago, so it seems pretty clear to me the only reason they’re clinging on is power, and maybe hubris.

[-] lynny@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Get all these geriatrics out of office and put age limits on all public officials. This is such a farce.

[-] JeffCraig@citizensgaming.com 8 points 1 year ago

Morgan Freeman voiceover: "He did not resign"

[-] PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
[-] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 1 year ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/nH11hjVqDdw

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.

[-] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I don't think he's neurologically capable of speaking for himself after yesterday. Get a power of attorney.

[-] RatMaster@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

Honestly I do feel like people get too old at some point to be in power positions, but instead of just having a strict age limit like a lot of people are saying here, there should just be some positions that have this limitation. They could still work as advisors and such, as long as they don't have the last word.

People like Bernie Sanders for example can provide a lot of insight and have lots of experience in the field which is useful. But to have someone that could potentially die from taking a wrong step as a leading figure is a bit silly.

[-] zephyrvs@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

people: you should resign because of cognitive malfunction

us establishment: <hides in a bush>

Edit: had to escape the tags so they're shown 🤔

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2023
381 points (97.3% liked)

politics

19144 readers
5483 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS