We need to find her phylactery first, otherwise she'll always return.
No.
No, no, no, no, no!
Is she looking at Feinstein and thinking “well, I don’t need to be propped up yet, so I should still be able to run the country!”
I don’t care on which side of the aisle these oldies sit. They do not represent the will of a people who are largely younger than they are by two decades.
No, she's looking at her and her husband's bank accounts and thinking "well, I don't need to be propped up yet, so I can continue to be grossly corrupt and get even richer"
Well, she is the queen of congressional insider trading…
She was # 6 in 2021, # 1 to 5 were all Republicans.
Then things didn't go as well in 2022
So how about we start paying attention to Republican tradings? 👍
Republicans are masters of messaging. They latch onto one thing for one person and pound it over and over again. The left accepts that these are bad things (they are) but won’t whatabout enough about the Republicans that do it worse, so this becomes Pelosi’s image while those that do it worse are unknown.
While you are right this has zero to do with whatever party you want to idolize it’s a problem for all sides we need to focus on all of them, none of these clowns should be able to make trades, they are in positions where they actually can shape the outcomes of their trades that’s fucking ridiculous
And on topic there needs to be some realistic term limits for these jackasses especially when they start to get older, nothing wrong with being old but if you are running a country and you get stuck staring at cameras in a daze it’s time to go.. ffs most people I know can’t wait to retire and would do so even earlier if they could yet these goblins are slopping it up at the trough
This is a class issue always has been
Never said it wasn't the case, I just pointed out the Pelosi is always the target when the fact is she's not the worst and there's zero attention put on any Republicans regarding that.
Explain how. Can you cite any trades that are particularly suspicious?
You're basically espousing right wing talking points that they came up with to divert attention from the republicans who are actively insider trading. There are plenty of things to criticize pelosi for rather than this stupid argument which isn't backed up by facts.
It’s not a Republican talking point. I’m as far left as they come and I’m offended by her corruption (even if Joe Manchin’s family seems worse).
So, he exercised his options he held for quite a while, a "week before House panel considered antitrust bills". What exactly was the insider information? And, he just exercised the options to hold the stock. Not sure how that's evidence of insider trading
I mention her trading because this is a post about her.
Corruption is corruption and it spans both chambers and all layers of government.
So you don't care if it's true or not, you're just mentioning it because you associate insider trading with pelosi for just random unrelated reasons?
Younger by two decades is still mid 60s/retirement age
The average age of constituents in her district is 40. I cant figure out how she keeps getting elected, unless she's just never had a peimary challenger worth a damn.
Hi, dem here. WE DONT WANT FUCKING ELDRITCH GODS REPRESENTING US anymore. Term limits. Term limits. Term limits.
Term limits and age limits.
The age thing I’m less interested in, but competency tests and health checks probably more so. Think they’d do the same thing but more precisely (some people shit out in their 70s, some people stay sharp until they’re 100)
The age limit thing is definitely a tradeoff. We would lose people like Pelosi and Trump (and Biden), but we'd also lose Bernie Sanders.
Good. There's tons of younger people who stand for the same things that Bernie stood for.
Anyone you’d like to shout out specifically, nows the perfect op
Some people shouldn't be eligible in their 30s. I don't know how we decide it though is the issue, and I don't trust that some conservative won't gain power and say "anyone who thinks corporations shouldn't be regulated is mentally ill" won't gain power.
But can you trust that they will remain sharp for 4 years (or whatever the term of the position they're running for)?
She is widely credited with marshalling the passage of former President Barack Obama's signature healthcare legislation, as well as bills to address infrastructure and climate change under incumbent President Joe Biden.
Her big claim to fame...
Getting republicans to vote for a more conservative healthcare plan than what the Republican candidate for president wanted to pass if he had won.
It's fucking disgusting moderates still act like that was the finish line over a decade later and oppose any more improvement to it, while demanding we call them progressive for it.
Although, once you're in your 70s, a decade probably feels like two weeks. Time flies when age related mental decline stops you from noticing the passage of time.
Hey, they had to get rid of the public option part and gut the bill to get some republican support! Ignore the fact that it was still passed entirely from a down party lines vote with zero republican support. They had to make it a shitty gutted bill for some reason. It was such an accomplishment forcing everyone to get healthcare from multi billion dollar companies with fat profit margins.
They had to get rid of the public option to get enough Democratic support to pass.
It was not a party line vote, 34 Democrats joined all the Republicans in voting No. It squeaked through the House, 219-212.
So, what you are saying, is that Democrats are extremely bad at getting their own party members to vote in line with what their voters want them to accomplish? Sounds about right.
"Getting their own party members" to vote for something is not as easy as you think. Just ask the current majority leader how easy it is to push around his "Freedom Caucus".
And the public option was not killed in the House. It was killed by Joe Lieberman, who was not even a Democrat any more. But he was the 60th Senate vote, he was opposed to it, and nobody - not even you - could have changed his mind. Consider that his final "F*** you" to his former party. So you can blame the people of Vermont for that, not Pelosi.
This could perhaps be excused if it was a one-off freak happenstance, but with Manchin and Sinema, it's obvious that the ol' switcharoo is intentional.
Manchin, Sinema, Boebert, McCain, Lieberman, and many others all serve to demonstrate that you shouldn't expect party members to vote together all of the time. Even if everyone in that list voted with their party >90% of the time.
It's not a "switcharoo", it's baked into a system in which representatives are ultimately chosen by constituents, not by party leaders. If anything, Congress was originally intended not to have longstanding parties or factions. It was originally intended for everyone to be like Manchin and Sinema. So like it or not, lack of party discipline is a feature not a bug.
Yet the republican party has no trouble keeping their dogs in line.
Are you kidding?
McCarthy is constantly trying to keep Gaetz, Boebert et al from forcing him out as Speaker. He wishes his caucus was as unified as the Democrats. As their leader, Pelosi watched Republicans turn against Hastert, then Boehner, then Ryan.
Reid kept his caucus of 60 together to pass the ACA, McConnell couldn't keep 50 together to repeal it.
Trump was constantly squabbling and calling out the Republican Congressional leadership. By comparison, Biden is best friends with the Democratic leadership.
The only thing the Congressional GOP is good at is obstruction, because that doesn't require any coordination. That's why they rely on the SCOTUS to actually advance their agenda.
Party squabbles mean little when ultimately they're getting their way. If anything, those squabbles push the republican party even more to the right and gets them even more of what they want. Passing the ACA was the best that the democrats could do with a super majority and even then it was a watered down bill.
But they aren't getting the legislation they want.
They failed to privatize Social Security, failed to repeal the ACA, failed to build a southern wall, etc.
In contrast, Democrats passed the ACA, passed Dodd-Frank, passed ARPA, passed the IRA, passed CHIP, etc.
Republicans only look successful because they had to drastically lower their bar for success. They don't want to pass laws any more, so it's easy to get what they want.
It's pretty obvious where the country is heading. You can pick and choose legislation, but the trajectory is clear. Also, things like ACA and Dodd-Frank were watered down trash. CHIPS was bipartisan because it was meant to stick it to China, but you're trying to rebrand it as a democratic victory.
I'm in her district. This has given me a possibly-crazy idea. What if I registered to run against her? Hear me out.
I don't think that I could win. She's been in the game for so long, I have no illusions. But, registering and announcing a campaign to challenge her might result in some national publication contacting me for a quote. I might be able to get a line in said publication and get people talking about it.
"Nancy Pelosi should get out of the way of younger generations and let those who came after her have a seat at the table."
I'd appreciate feedback on the value of doing something like this. Also, the likelihood that it would have the desired outcome. Also, thoughts on how this might be done.
I've been kicking this idea around since this morning when I first saw this. I'm increasingly thinking that it sounds like a good idea. Thoughts?
I think the local DNC would have to "allow" it. Otherwise you'd run as something-other-than-Democratic.
But all it would cost you is time, and maybe a small filling fee to find out.
I say, go for it! It would at least shake up the geriatric incumbents a bit.
The local DNC could potentially work against you but they can't stop you from running in the primary as long as you meet the requirements.
Awesome, that's good to know! I just assumed they picked if there would be competition due to how some Republicans threatened to "primary" incumbents that didn't fall in line.
Do it! As one of the most notable Democrats alive it'd be a near impossible task to unseat her, but maybe you get 20% of the vote and that's not a terrible result. After that maybe someone more notable like a Mayor or state rep would run and maybe win. Shoot your shot!
We need a competitor. Please do it.
have you heard of Shahid Buttar
Apparently, I had. The first two links on a search had already been visited. That's discouraging. Thanks!
He had a good platform too; a true leftist planning for the future of AI, UBI, etc. She just straight out refused to debate him. Then she ran a smear PR campaign on him just to be sure
Running in such a prominent campaign would probably make your life suck. Pelosi's seasoned team would probably go through your entire life with a fine-toothed comb and spin anything remotely negative about you to make it seem like you were a serial killer. The Republicans, meanwhile, might throw money into supporting you without caring if you wanted their "help" just to make Pelosi's life hell.
There are probably already real challengers who actually want the job who you could support instead. If you donated to them and volunteered for them, they might make enough noise to at least get some headlines. And, you wouldn't have to stick your own neck out.
"Nancy Pelosi should get out of the way of younger generations and let those who came after her have a seat at the table."
Don't stop with her. Make your platform about Glitch McConnell, Dianne "The Wraith" Feinstein, Chuck "Touch" Grassley, and every other member of Congress who can't even claim to be a boomer because they were born before the end of WW2. Their generation built the America we have now; how's it working out for y'all?
Do it!
Here's what you do, announce that you're running, say your peace, and when you're surfing that publicity wave, announce that you're running for governor of California. No flaw!
I wish you would. Get your friends to do it too... "Nancy Pelosi Faces a Dozen Primary Challengers" might draw some more attention.
I think we should also include term limits for these offices in addition to the age limit.
You can’t be president for more than 8 years, but you can be in the same political office more or less for almost 40? That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me lol.
Yes, term limits are a much better solution as age restrictions can be a slippery slope.
It would also make you useless as your term comes to an end. Political capital and IOUs are the currency in the capitol
Right, I mean those are the things we are saying are bad.
The culture of the Senate and Congress would need to change, and I think it would rather quickly. Unfortunately this is an issue both Republicans and Democrats will never support because the very people entrenched in power would need to vote themselves out of power. It will literally never happen.
Why do you think that term limits will solve it? If there's no seniority whip, what other motivation do they have besides corporate donations? I.E., take all the bribes they can in their short tenure?
Don't tell me more idealistic politicians will make it to the top. I don't believe that for a second.
I guess I'd flip that question. Why do you think being career politicians gives them motivation besides bribes and money?
Because that's the thing, they know they're running another campaign in a couple years, they always need to be raising money for the next one. They always need to solicit donations. And they can't do anything that rocks the boat because it affects the next election.
Presidents very commonly get more done during their second term because they aren't worried about the political impact of their actions affecting their ability to get elected again. I don't see why this effect wouldn't be the same for Congress and the Senate.
Can't we just vote for younger candidates?
Doesn't make sense to subvert the will of the people when they clearly support this.
Also, her age isn't what makes her shit. She's a corporate democrat just looking out for different rich people.
The problem is that this isn’t the will of the people. Preliminaries don’t count as an election so your vote for which candidate that appears on the actual ballot is just a suggestion.
The party committees gets final say on who’s on the ballot for that party to vote for.
Which leads to the problem of the 2 party system where we vote for the least worst candidate
Then vote for independents, or people whose parties don't pull that shit.
And that is the problem with the 2 party system. No one votes that way because not enough people do. Instead everyone voted for less bad option between the 2 major parties. Which happen to be the choices the political committee chose, not the people.
Yeah, you might as well not vote. You're never going to sway enough people to vote independent to challenge one of the big two, especially since the choice right now is between old people or people trying to establish a fascist theocracy.
Alright, then these problems don't get solved.
Now, you’re getting it.
You are correct. Voting isn't going to solve this problem.
Collectively we vote for the representation we deserve.
Maybe in a true democracy. No more gerrymandered districts, ranked choice voting, and term limits would be a good start. Let's kill citizens united while at it.
In a true democracy, we'd have direct voting.
Which I'm a huge fan of. Not sure why we'd vote for people who won't agree with us on everything when we can just vote ourselves and get true representation.
I’d prefer a republic, what the hell do I know about complex foreign policies with the relationship between Sudan and Egypt, or which tax policy will spur economic growth?
That's fine. Just don't complain when the people you elect go against what you think is right.
Personally, I think direct voting would result in people voting for the matters they care about, while ignoring the ones they don't.
Nah, I blame the Republicans for most of the nations current woes since, you know, they tend to be behind most of them.
Plus, how can you see how the average American acts and think we’re still good for a democracy? We need a more fitting class of people to rule, as Adams and Hamilton envisioned it.
What do you think should be the criteria to be included in "a more fitting class of people?"
Some sort of an aristocratic society of intelligent men and women but that would be dreaming
Republicans are mostly to blame. Democrats are just the lesser evil.
Lo' and behold, evil is still evil.
It doesn't make sense to support the lesser evil when you could support no evil at all.
Aren’t you so lucky to be someone who can choose to sit on the fence and not suffer the consequences. Do you understand idiotic that statement is?
Jesus Christ, I hate to do Godwins Law here but just because when you have one side that is Nazi Germany that wants to dominate the world, kill all the undesirables, all that good stuff. Then you take a gander at the British; sure, they are a world colonial empire that deserves to be shattered but they are a democracy that DOESN’T dream of world conquest and killing everyone on earth, so any nonbraindead person would pick the side of the “br’ish”.
And you, over there just sitting there thinking “heh, one side has a small amount of evil while the other is the embodiment of evil so I’m going to do nothing.”
Sure, an extreme example, but the principal is the exact same.
Take Civil Rights, just because sometimes the civil rights people may be annoying and rarely takes a few things too far DOESN’T mean they’re the same as the horrific segregationists and the KKK, who’ll kill and lynch whoever they don’t like.
Please, grow and learn.
Imagine going “My choices are between the Nazis or the British Empire” and thinking the answer is one of them and not burning the whole thing down if that’s the best it can offer you.
You get what you settle for.
Calm down. I stopped reading as soon as you came at me with animosity.
If you want me to take you seriously, talk with less emotion and more logical reasoning.
Between their shenanigans in India and Ireland the British empire was arguably worse than nazi Germany lmao what a dumb analogy
You really are a dumbass, aren’t ya? Making an argument that the Nazis were all that bad.
I suppose that’s fair, any concession, no matter how small, will constitute a defeat to your side so you must stand your ground and defend the undefendable.
I disagree. Fundamentally we have the final authority to elect our representation. Collectively we decide (and are ultimately responsible for) who is elected to office. Districts don't vote, and corporations don't vote. The people do.
It is the collective responsibility of those not disenfranchised or otherwise excluded from the political system to rectify those problems. Failing to address those problems (or any political problem) isn't a failure of the politicians--it's a failure of us, as a collective, to choose the appropriate lawmakers. Especially when we repeatedly elect the same people over and over.
I know it sounds naive to frame the system this way. But fundamentally the political system operates under the collective authority of voters.
I’m angry at her, but more angry at the voters that reelect her. Get new blood into these positions.
Two party system that the party gets to choose who runs.
While that does suck, there are options in the primary. So you can vote her out without voting for a Republican, if that's anathema/unrealistic in her district.
Only if there is a primary. There often isn't much of a challenge to the incumbent.
Also, Bernie Sanders. If they don't want one particular person to win the primary, they'll make sure it works out that way.
Should be anathema in every district.
Fuck this horrible bitch. She fucking enriches herself via a marriage of her position and decision making with the stock market.
Fucking disgusting, no fucking politician that votes on policy should be allowed to trade stocks.
GET THE FUCK OUT AND STAY OUT YOU GERIATRIC FUCKING CORRUPT TRAITOR
Settle down, trumper.
Nothing to do with Trumper, he's right. Just like Trump should go to prison along with anyone who helped him on Jan 6
You agree with this crap that person posted? --> (GET THE FUCK OUT AND STAY OUT YOU GERIATRIC FUCKING CORRUPT TRAITOR) NO. He/she/they are NOT right.
You can dislike Nancy Pelosi and not be a Trumper. They are not mutually exclusive.
Yeah. I hate Nancy Pelosi. I hate Trump MORE, but I hate him more than just about anyone. Pelosi is still a garbage person.
Okay, but "traitor"? Let's not devalue the word by throwing it around at everyone who engages in systemic graft.
Sure. But the statement made by the user I was responding to was pure trumper BS.
I don't see how what they said has anything to do with supporting Trump, Pelosi is corrupt and too old. You should focus your anger on actual Trump cultists.
They accused her of being a traitor. Read the all caps portion of the trumpist rant.
She might not necessarily be a traitor in the traditional sense of the word, but she did betray the American people when she began to enrich herself using her position and choose blustering instead of doing her job.
If you think this hasn't been the norm among politicians for two hundred years, I have a skyscraper in Iowa to sell you.
Pelosi is only a favorite target for the rightful ire about it because of her prominence and her gender. That justified anger could and should be directed at any of a dozen others who are even worse.
Yeah your whataboutism is pointless. The crypt keeper makes plenty enough money to pay for real white knights if she wanted, no need for an online defense force.
Lol, I'm not about to defend Pelosi, just wanted to point out the agenda inherent in those who jump to villifying her before others who are worse.
I'm a lifelong dem and I generally agree with the sentiment, minis the name-calling on his part. Her shady stock market trades are problematic at best, and we need young blood in the game. I'm hoping for a strong contender against her and I think many folks feel the same.
You're what's wrong with politics these days. You don't have to be fully locked in to one side you know?
The fucked up thing is that people are still gonna vote for her. No one cares about corruption or acrually having good political leaders, they just need their team to win like it's some kind of stupid sport.
Blues and Greens...just like the Byzantines
Or they know how important it is that the Republicans not win.
It's not just about keeping score and keeping points for the red team. The blue team is currently fighting for white supremacy, christian supremacy, male supremacy, and to change the rules to make any other political party irrelevant.
If someone as wonderful as Mr. Rogers ran against Nancy Pelosi, but that person said he'd vote with his Republican colleagues on every important issue, his own personal qualities wouldn't matter. He personally might not lie, cheat or steal, but he'd be supporting a party that openly does all those things.
It sucks, but when it's a first-past-the-post system with 2 major parties, you mostly have to hold your nose and vote against the greater evil.
Because there is no corruption. Right wing conspiracy theories aren't fact
There's corruption. The whole system is corrupt and Pelosi is a whirlwind of corruption. Does not make right wing conspiracy theories any more correct, though.
"the whole system is corrupt"
Take off your tinfoil
Stocks aren't going to inside trade themselves! Get out of the way you old cunt. Hopefully someone primaries her and the people in SF vote her out. Still worse to have a Republican in the seat but jfc this is infuriating.
There really needs to be age limits on government positions.
Term limits, too.
Trading limits, too.
Well, I’d say some sort of blind trust. That way, the only way they can influence their investments is making good decisions for the overall economy. Toss in some restrictions to require they avoid boomer-chip stocks. (Ie, s&p500 type investments would be okay, but not msft or any specific company. ETFs in general are too…easy to get around though.
Yeah, I agree but the problem with that is they can still time macro events that affect index funds and ETFs when they know about something big before the public, like covid.
It should be managed and timed by someone independent and the trust just pays a salary or allowance on a schedule.
That’s the point of the BLIND trust.
They’re not making the trades. They don’t even see where things are. they can’t time trade’s because they don’t make investment decisions. At all.
They can still invest by dumping cash into an account and somebody managing it for them. Like the 401k managers the poors get :)
We do have age limits, but only minimum age. Any time there's a min age, there needs to be a corresponding max age.
But then again Bernie Sanders has done a lot to help "wake up" the minds of many millennials and zoomers.
He's also too old imo
And some psychiatric tests, to see if she still has all the necessary faculties for decisions. The cognitive decay is as sure as death and taxes
TOO OLD
another canidate question
what has your past politics done for me locally? even nationally?
if the answer is unsure or maybe some tv propaganda answer that was fed to you then why do they deserve votes
You don't think Pelosi has done anything to advance the Democratic agenda? I don't live in her district, so I'm not sure about locally, but I do think she's been highly influential nationally, and I personally think she has done a good job.
That being said, her district is safe Democratic even if she doesn't run. She should retire, enjoy the rest of her life with her family and leave feeling good about her accomplishments. It's someone else's job to carry on the work.
Well we sure know she used her position to advance her wallet
But yeah go off, defend this geriatric corrupt traitor. She’s not fucking special she’s a literal enemy of the people due to said corruption
I'm as left leaning as they come and this old bitch should retire. This is one of the many many many differences between us. All you care about is winning, like this is some type of fucking football game, and I care about is what's best for our country.
Apparently not in California, home to both Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein.
Ugh get these dinosaurs out of office. I do not feel represented by someone who is a millionaire and over twice my age, they have no understanding of what my life is like or what I need.
We seriously need age limits for elected officials, it's absolutely absurd to have an octogenarian in a position of authority like that.
While we're at it, term limits for congress would be nice - 19 terms is absolutely ridiculous.
Didn't Ruth teach these geriatric roadblocks anything?!?
maybe US voters who should take more than colors and letters into consideration
such as job resume over the years, what are they financially invested in, past examples of experience, et cetera
Someone fucking primary her ass
Her district is jam packed full of the most elite liberals in the country. They love her. She's one of them. Realistically, the only one who'd replace her would be a carbon copy of her.
"Liberals" meaning fiscally conservative establishment donors whose social views are centrist or indifferent at best.
Yes, liberals. They're all cut from the same cloth. Right-wingers who'll wear a pride shirt in June.
Careful now, the libs will start calling you a tankie ! 😂
Boomers, agnostic of any party affiliation, have brain worms.
She is the generation before boomers: the silent generation.
Not better.
they are.
doesn't mean they shouldn't be doing anything other than enjoying their remaining years not running countries
Holy crap when I saw the headline at first I thought it was an obit
If she pulls a McConnell I’m claiming copyright on “Nance in a Trance.”
With ants in her pants
Oh fuck off with the dinosaurs
Wonder how her husbands portfolio has been doing since she left.
Any significant gains? Does he really have that midas touch without her fortunate position.
Lol the hammer attack would have been a great exit strategy. Oh well would you look at that, ever since my husband got his head beat in with a hammer he just can't seem to pick stocks as well.
I think it got hammered lately. Too soon?
We need age limits for politicians. I’d be more than fine with that being 60. But this skeleton is 83; she will be 88 by the time her term is done if she wins again. Nobody near 90 should decide the future of the younger generations
I'd make it whatever the retirement age is. In Australia, that would be 67. If we have an age where we agree it's time to collect your pension and live out your life, then it should apply to politicians as well.
No, we don't actually have this policy. Plenty of our pollies are over 67.
Wouldn't she be 86, not 88? House term length is just 2 years, so that term would end Jan 3rd 2027 and her birthday is March 26, 1940
(Not saying 86 is young, just want to be accurate)
Then the younger generation should vote and often
Well, if you want her to stop being in Congress, you know what to do in the primaries.
I'd vote against Pelosi in the primaries for the same reason I'd vote against Biden or Trump or McConnell or Feinstein in the primaries. They're all too fucking old. The average age of the Senate is 64 years. The average age of the House of Representatives is 57 years.
Here's every senator or congressperson age 68 or older.
State
Senator
Age
Birthdate
Party
Iowa
Charles E. Grassley
89
9/17/33
R
California
Dianne Feinstein
89
6/22/33
D
Vermont
Bernie Sanders
81
9/8/41
I
Kentucky
Mitch McConnell
80
2/20/42
R
Maryland
Benjamin L. Cardin
79
10/5/43
D
Idaho
Jim Risch
79
5/3/43
R
Illinois
Richard J. Durbin
78
11/21/44
D
Maine
Angus King
78
3/31/44
I
Massachusetts
Edward J. Markey
76
7/11/46
D
Connecticut
Richard Blumenthal
76
2/13/46
D
Utah
Mitt Romney
75
3/12/47
R
Vermont
Peter Welch
75
5/2/47
D
Hawaii
Mazie K. Hirono
75
11/3/47
D
West Virginia
Joe Manchin III
75
8/24/47
D
New Hampshire
Jeanne Shaheen
75
1/28/47
D
Delaware
Thomas R. Carper
75
1/23/47
D
Rhode Island
Jack Reed
73
11/12/49
D
Oregon
Ron Wyden
73
5/3/49
D
Massachusetts
Elizabeth Warren
73
6/22/49
D
Arkansas
John Boozman
72
12/10/50
R
Michigan
Debbie Stabenow
72
4/29/50
D
New York
Charles E. Schumer
72
11/23/50
D
Washington
Patty Murray
72
10/11/50
D
Mississippi
Roger Wicker
71
7/5/51
R
Idaho
Michael D. Crapo
71
5/20/51
R
Louisiana
John Kennedy
71
11/21/51
R
Nebraska
Deb Fischer
71
3/1/51
R
Colorado
John Hickenlooper
70
2/7/52
D
Florida
Rick Scott
70
12/1/52
R
Texas
John Cornyn
70
2/2/52
R
Wyoming
John Barrasso
70
7/21/52
R
Maine
Susan Collins
70
12/7/52
R
Ohio
Sherrod Brown
70
11/9/52
D
Tennessee
Marsha Blackburn
70
6/6/52
R
West Virginia
Shelley Moore Capito
69
11/26/53
R
New Jersey
Bob Menendez
69
1/1/54
D
Virginia
Mark Warner
68
12/15/54
D
Alabama
Tommy Tuberville
68
9/18/54
R
Kansas
Jerry Moran
68
5/29/54
R
Indiana
Mike Braun
68
3/24/54
R
South Dakota
Mike Rounds
68
10/24/54
R
Wyoming
Cynthia Lummis
68
9/10/54
R
District
Congressperson
Age
Birthdate
Party
CA-31
Grace F. Napolitano
86
12/4/36
Democratic
DC-AL
Eleanor Holmes Norton
85
6/13/37
Democratic
KY-05
Harold Rogers
85
12/31/37
Republican
NJ-09
Bill Pascrell Jr.
85
1/25/37
Democratic
CA-43
Maxine Waters
84
8/15/38
Democratic
MD-05
Steny H. Hoyer
83
6/14/39
Democratic
SC-06
James E. Clyburn
82
7/21/40
Democratic
CA-11
Nancy Pelosi
82
3/26/40
Democratic
IL-07
Danny K. Davis
81
9/6/41
Democratic
TX-31
John Carter
81
11/6/41
Republican
CA-16
Anna G. Eshoo
80
12/13/42
Democratic
FL-24
Frederica S. Wilson
80
11/5/42
Democratic
CT-03
Rosa DeLauro
79
3/2/43
Democratic
NC-05
Virginia Foxx
79
6/29/43
Republican
TX-12
Kay Granger
79
1/18/43
Republican
CA-07
Doris Matsui
78
9/25/44
Democratic
IL-09
Jan Schakowsky
78
5/26/44
Democratic
MO-05
Emanuel Cleaver II
78
10/26/44
Democratic
GA-13
David Scott
77
6/27/45
Democratic
IN-04
Jim Baird
77
6/4/45
Republican
NJ-12
Bonnie Watson Coleman
77
2/6/45
Democratic
CA-08
John Garamendi
77
1/24/45
Democratic
OH-09
Marcy Kaptur
76
6/17/46
Democratic
TX-37
Lloyd Doggett
76
10/6/46
Democratic
CA-12
Barbara Lee
76
7/16/46
Democratic
NC-12
Alma Adams
76
5/27/46
Democratic
MD-02
C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger
76
1/31/46
Democratic
TX-09
Al Green
75
9/1/47
Democratic
VA-03
Robert C. Scott
75
4/30/47
Democratic
GA-02
Sanford D. Bishop Jr.
75
2/4/47
Democratic
NY-12
Jerrold Nadler
75
6/13/47
Democratic
CA-18
Zoe Lofgren
75
12/21/47
Democratic
FL-08
Bill Posey
75
12/18/47
Republican
AS-AL
Aumua Amata Coleman Radewagen
75
12/29/47
Republican
SC-02
Joe Wilson
75
7/31/47
Republican
MI-01
Jack Bergman
75
2/2/47
Republican
FL-22
Lois Frankel
74
5/16/48
Democratic
MS-02
Bennie Thompson
74
1/28/48
Democratic
OR-03
Earl Blumenauer
74
8/16/48
Democratic
CT-01
John B. Larson
74
7/22/48
Democratic
AZ-07
Raul M. Grijalva
74
2/19/48
Democratic
PA-16
Mike Kelly
74
5/10/48
Republican
TX-36
Brian Babin
74
3/23/48
Republican
MD-07
Kweisi Mfume
74
10/24/48
Democratic
NY-20
Paul Tonko
73
6/18/49
Democratic
TN-09
Steve Cohen
73
5/24/49
Democratic
OK-04
Tom Cole
73
4/28/49
Republican
TX-25
Roger Williams
73
9/13/49
Republican
MA-01
Richard E. Neal
73
2/14/49
Democratic
FL-11
Daniel Webster
73
4/27/49
Republican
ID-02
Mike Simpson
72
9/8/50
Republican
TX-29
Sylvia R. Garcia
72
9/6/50
Democratic
NV-01
Dina Titus
72
5/23/50
Democratic
OH-03
Joyce Beatty
72
3/12/50
Democratic
VA-11
Gerald E. Connolly
72
3/30/50
Democratic
WV-01
Carol Miller
72
11/4/50
Republican
TX-18
Sheila Jackson Lee
72
1/12/50
Democratic
TX-26
Michael C. Burgess
72
12/23/50
Republican
VA-08
Donald S. Beyer Jr.
72
6/20/50
Democratic
FL-16
Vern Buchanan
71
5/8/51
Republican
CA-04
Mike Thompson
71
1/24/51
Democratic
NJ-06
Frank Pallone Jr.
71
10/30/51
Democratic
WI-04
Gwen Moore
71
4/18/51
Democratic
MI-05
Tim Walberg
71
4/12/51
Republican
GA-12
Rick W. Allen
71
11/7/51
Republican
UT-04
Burgess Owens
71
8/2/51
Republican
CA-21
Jim Costa
70
4/13/52
Democratic
MA-09
William Keating
70
9/6/52
Democratic
FL-05
John Rutherford
70
9/2/52
Republican
CA-26
Julia Brownley
70
8/28/52
Democratic
CA-10
Mark DeSaulnier
70
3/31/52
Democratic
OR-02
Cliff Bentz
70
1/12/52
Republican
MO-03
Blaine Luetkemeyer
70
5/7/52
Republican
HI-01
Ed Case
70
9/27/52
Democratic
MI-06
Debbie Dingell
69
11/23/53
Democratic
CA-28
Judy Chu
69
7/7/53
Democratic
CA-41
Ken Calvert
69
6/8/53
Republican
NY-07
Nydia M. Velazquez
69
3/28/53
Democratic
TX-03
Keith Self
69
3/20/53
Republican
CA-48
Darrell Issa
69
11/1/53
Republican
CT-02
Joe Courtney
69
4/6/53
Democratic
NJ-02
Jeff Van Drew
69
2/23/53
Republican
NY-05
Gregory W. Meeks
69
9/25/53
Democratic
TX-14
Randy Weber
69
7/2/53
Republican
FL-02
Neal Dunn
69
2/16/53
Republican
SC-05
Ralph Norman
69
6/20/53
Republican
NJ-04
Christopher H. Smith
69
3/4/53
Republican
PA-03
Dwight Evans
68
5/16/54
Democratic
MI-13
Shri Thanedar
68
1/1/55
Democratic
OR-01
Suzanne Bonamici
68
10/14/54
Democratic
GA-04
Hank Johnson
68
10/2/54
Democratic
NY-13
Adriano Espaillat
68
9/27/54
Democratic
MN-04
Betty McCollum
68
7/12/54
Democratic
CA-32
Brad Sherman
68
10/24/54
Democratic
AL-06
Gary Palmer
68
5/14/54
Republican
FL-28
Carlos Gimenez
68
1/17/54
Republican
OH-06
Bill Johnson
68
11/10/54
Republican
That's.... eye-opening
Pelosi in particular isn't just old but is also showing some signs of seriously impaired memory at the least.
Trump is only 5 years younger, convicted of rape, facing 91 criminal felony charges and is running for re-election.
Instead of being anti red or anti blue how about you be anti fuckwit?
Trump was not convicted of rape.
Yes indeed he was. He was found to be GUILTY of raping E Jean Carroll
No, he was not. You are spreading misinformation. He was found to liable for rape. A conviction is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, liable is more likely than not guilty. This is not pedantic, this is the difference between decades in jail and not.
He raped E Jean Carroll -- period. You can worship rapist trump all you like. Go ahead.
That's not what you said. You said he was convicted of rape, that's not true. If you take pointing out a factual inaccuracy as worshipping Trump you're just as much a tribalist as those on Jan. 6
Technically right because it was a civil case rather than a criminal case. He was found liable for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll.
This is kinda the national form of the village elder.
Not American, but would vote Democrat.
What an absolute embarrassment. This is how to fumble your lead with young voters.
Democrats are a very frustrating party to be with. The alternative is 50 years out of date, racists, homophobic assholes, so you're stuck with democrats. So they put up the worst fucking candidates and we're just stuck with them because if we don't vote for them it's voting for some backwards asshole.
Worse is republicans think we love these people. No we fucking don't, get these old people out and get me someone who represents me. They're just the lesser of two evils
Skeksis need to retire, not collapse into dust while holding on to the royal scepter.
The land is dying, and the Skeksis continue to drain its life force
There should be age limits in politics. Such as retirement age minus minimum voting age. It would be 67-18 in the US. Make it so you can’t run again after you exceeded the limit.
Democrats and republicans are just looking out for different rich people.
If we ever want this nation to improve, we need to focus on independents. Party lines need to die.
Boy I was really hoping that headline had a different ending.
As a Dem, let me just say, please god no. We need younger people in Congress. It’s time to let go Nancy. I hope she gets primaried. Take Feinstein and Mcconnel with you on your way out.
"We are gathered here today to honor the memory of Nancy Pelosi, who-"
"Wait, no! I'm still running for Senate in 2032! I just switched to the Zombie Party!"
"...I told you guys this should have been a closed casket funeral."
Both sides are the same
Age
Can both the right and left agree to start electing people in their 40s or 50s for a change?
People need to ask why incumbents almost always win even if there are so many valid reasons for them to move on. The answer is pretty simple. $$$
Yeah, fuck these old, out of touch assholes who keep clinging to power and refuse to let the next generation come in.
Glad I stopped donating to the assholes a decade ago but fuck them all.
“Well I Think, I could use a good fuck”…. Pelosi maybe.
Primary her.
I'm a progressive. I usually vote Democrat, because the Republicans are horrible. Pelosi represents everything I despise about the Democratic party establishment: serving the corporate billionaires, and blocking anything that helps working people. Sure there are many Democrats who I support, but Pelosi is NOT one of them!
Not feeling great about this.
US politics really romanticizing elderly abuse.
If the money and perks are good, why not??
Her net worth is like $100 million, I really doubt she seeks reelection for the money.
Those insider trading perks are just too good to give up
If they made $0 for the rest of their lives they'd still be rich by natural death.
This is a high score run, nothing more.
It's the American way.
Her husband and his company profit handsomely from her insider knowledge.
She's trying to get to $200M, obviously.
Yeah, cut congressional salaries to $10k a year and see how long the old folks stick around. Eliminates career politicians, too.
Then the only people who can actually be congresspeople will be the ones who are already rich. Public service should pay enough that those who work in government shouldn't need a second source of income to provide for their families. Paying politicians $10k a year will only incentivize them to accept bribes from lobbyist and corporations, leading to career politicians.
Unlike today where they get paid so much they don’t accept bribes from lobbyists and corporations, leading to career politicians.
I never said that if you pay them enough then they won't take bribes. You could pay them a billion dollars a year and there'll still be some corrupt bastards looking for bribes.
What I was saying was that if you don't pay them anything, then it will be impossible for regular, working class people to ever become politicians.
Set it to minimum wage and see how quickly that raise goes up. Lol
These old career politicians don't become millionaires from their federal salaries.they have PACs and get paid to be guest speakers. After they quit, they get paid millions a year to be consultants or some bullshit title VP where they only meet once a year to justify "working".
Manchin has a yatch and he's from one of the poorest states. Boats in general are a huge money sink and this asshole has a boat with enough square footage to be a regular house, 1500.
Whenever I think of West Virginia I think of rundown early 20th century homes and barefoot kids in overalls. I know it's a stereotype, but check out that video. It's so sad that they fight so hard for the coal mines that killed 3 generations because it's the only steady income in the area.
I don't condone killing politicians, but I do think tar and feathering should become fashionable again. If you're too old to outrun your constituents or survive your chickening, you're to old to represent them.
hahahh its cute you think their salaries are where their money comes from
Usually these style titles are for deaths, and I got excited for a moment
DINOs out
She probably doesn't want to hang around the house and watch underwear hammer fights.
She doesn’t want to give up hubby’s hot streak on stock trading.
Why was it necessary to include her age in this headline?
Because she's a dinosaur and her age is very relevant to the situation.
"dinosaur"
That's delusional talk
She. Is. 83. Years. Old.
And?
How the hell is it possible for her to be in touch with me a 40 something year old? How about those in their 20s? She doesn't represent us nor have any idea what it's like. It's impossible.
How you think this is OK is insane!
Because cognitive ability and reasoning declines with age after a certain point. Not sure what that point is but it’s definately in the 70s and 80s
a) are you a doctor
b) that's ageism not fact
c) there's plenty of 40 year olds in congress that are worse
American Dissident and unable to vote here
WHY THE F##K DO Y'ALL PEOPLE KEEP VOTING THESE F##KS BACK IN ? IS IT TO HAVE SOMETHING TO B###H ABOUT LATER ONLINE?
talking to y'all will definitly vote biden this fall because his name does not start with T
sounds like Pakleds voting
Nancy Pelosi is awesome. Best politician on the planet and the fascist GOP are terrified of her.
We do legitimately have a gerontocracy problem and this doesn't help, but at the same time as long as she's capable of doing the job I can't in good conscience object either. The beauty of our system of government is anyone can run. You don't like her, run against her or STFU and quit screaming at the clouds.
The beauty of our system of government is anyone can run. You don’t like her, run against her or STFU and quit screaming at the clouds.
You act like primaries are fair...
Even the DNC stopped doing that years ago, why do you still believe it?
The Court continued, “For their part, the DNC and Wasserman Schultz have characterized the DNC charter’s promise of ‘impartiality and evenhandedness’ as a mere political promise—political rhetoric that is not enforceable in federal courts. The Court does not accept this trivialization of the DNC’s governing principles. While it may be true in the abstract that the DNC has the right to have its delegates ‘go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way,’ the DNC, through its charter, has committed itself to a higher principle.”
No, no. You see buttery emails and stuff, they never deliberately worked against Bernie to ensure Clinton won. Totally it was all the people voting.
brings up Bernie in current year
😴
Pretends the same corruption magically no longer exists
🇺🇸
if the dnc didn't like fucking up primaries, bernie's vp would be the front-runner in 2024. oh, and the country would be in a lot better shape than it is now, too.
i hope california can come up with a candidate that can challenge pelosi in the primaries.
The Court continued, “For their part, the DNC and Wasserman Schultz have characterized the DNC charter’s promise of ‘impartiality and evenhandedness’ as a mere political promise—political rhetoric that is not enforceable in federal courts. The Court does not accept this trivialization of the DNC’s governing principles. While it may be true in the abstract that the DNC has the right to have its delegates ‘go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way,’ the DNC, through its charter, has committed itself to a higher principle.”
I'm not saying the DNC isn't biased. But it looks like that was a legal arguments made by lawyers. Generally, they make every argument they can fit into their brief.
It was only their lawyers and the person running it at the time that said it, that doesn't count!
Conflating
Shahid Buttar was a very good candidate running against Pelosi. DNC wasn't happy and the idiot Dem voters from the District just fell in line behind the incumbent as both party's voters tend to do. It's just a fucked up, dysfunctional system we have going here.
Lookee there. The candidate didn't get the support or votes and lost. Therefore it's a dysfunctional system. If you added "and it must be destroyed" you could join the Republican party. Candidates lose. It happen every election.
It's a dysfunctional system because of the way it is. If you can't see it...well, I don't know what to tell you. I would love to get a pair of those rose-tinted ignorance-is-bliss glasses.
All I know, friend, is that the same system has worked for over 100 years.
True, anyone can technically run. But in practice, a fresh-faced new candidate going up against a well-funded incumbent will very very rarely win. The few times it has happened the incumbent either didn’t take the threat seriously (AOC), or the incumbent was involved in a big scandal.
For your well-intentioned version of America to exist in reality, we’d need to do a few things: overturn Citizens United, require that all elections be fully publicly funded, ban private political donations, and stop letting elected officials draw their own maps. Until then, the gerontocracy will go on.
You give me a dozen reasons why can't win. Maybe your the wrong person for the job.
Someday I'll tell you the story of 7 of 11 and Obama.
Oh I'm definitely the wrong person for the job. And I'm not running, see above.
Not sure about you but I don't have the time or money to run.
But you do live in the district? Excellent. Now get some support and raise some money. Make sure to talk to the party of choice. Get some petitions signed. You have to work to get on a ballot.
Oh for fucks sakes.
Fuck’s sake *
She's only one more reelection to lichdom.
We should turn her into a giant baby.
We need to find her phylactery first, otherwise she'll always return.
No.
No, no, no, no, no!
Is she looking at Feinstein and thinking “well, I don’t need to be propped up yet, so I should still be able to run the country!”
I don’t care on which side of the aisle these oldies sit. They do not represent the will of a people who are largely younger than they are by two decades.
No, she's looking at her and her husband's bank accounts and thinking "well, I don't need to be propped up yet, so I can continue to be grossly corrupt and get even richer"
Well, she is the queen of congressional insider trading…
She was # 6 in 2021, # 1 to 5 were all Republicans.
Then things didn't go as well in 2022
So how about we start paying attention to Republican tradings? 👍
Republicans are masters of messaging. They latch onto one thing for one person and pound it over and over again. The left accepts that these are bad things (they are) but won’t whatabout enough about the Republicans that do it worse, so this becomes Pelosi’s image while those that do it worse are unknown.
While you are right this has zero to do with whatever party you want to idolize it’s a problem for all sides we need to focus on all of them, none of these clowns should be able to make trades, they are in positions where they actually can shape the outcomes of their trades that’s fucking ridiculous
And on topic there needs to be some realistic term limits for these jackasses especially when they start to get older, nothing wrong with being old but if you are running a country and you get stuck staring at cameras in a daze it’s time to go.. ffs most people I know can’t wait to retire and would do so even earlier if they could yet these goblins are slopping it up at the trough
This is a class issue always has been
Never said it wasn't the case, I just pointed out the Pelosi is always the target when the fact is she's not the worst and there's zero attention put on any Republicans regarding that.
Explain how. Can you cite any trades that are particularly suspicious?
You're basically espousing right wing talking points that they came up with to divert attention from the republicans who are actively insider trading. There are plenty of things to criticize pelosi for rather than this stupid argument which isn't backed up by facts.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-07/pelosi-s-husband-locked-in-5-3-million-from-alphabet-options?srnd=premium#xj4y7vzkg Paul Pelosi is forever making suspiciously well-timed trades. When it became a scandal, they intentionally sold Nvidia shares at a loss to try to end scrutiny of that trade.
It’s not a Republican talking point. I’m as far left as they come and I’m offended by her corruption (even if Joe Manchin’s family seems worse).
So, he exercised his options he held for quite a while, a "week before House panel considered antitrust bills". What exactly was the insider information? And, he just exercised the options to hold the stock. Not sure how that's evidence of insider trading
I mention her trading because this is a post about her.
Corruption is corruption and it spans both chambers and all layers of government.
So you don't care if it's true or not, you're just mentioning it because you associate insider trading with pelosi for just random unrelated reasons?
Younger by two decades is still mid 60s/retirement age
The average age of constituents in her district is 40. I cant figure out how she keeps getting elected, unless she's just never had a peimary challenger worth a damn.
Hi, dem here. WE DONT WANT FUCKING ELDRITCH GODS REPRESENTING US anymore. Term limits. Term limits. Term limits.
Term limits and age limits.
The age thing I’m less interested in, but competency tests and health checks probably more so. Think they’d do the same thing but more precisely (some people shit out in their 70s, some people stay sharp until they’re 100)
The age limit thing is definitely a tradeoff. We would lose people like Pelosi and Trump (and Biden), but we'd also lose Bernie Sanders.
Good. There's tons of younger people who stand for the same things that Bernie stood for.
Anyone you’d like to shout out specifically, nows the perfect op
And probably a lot less delusional.
Some people shouldn't be eligible in their 30s. I don't know how we decide it though is the issue, and I don't trust that some conservative won't gain power and say "anyone who thinks corporations shouldn't be regulated is mentally ill" won't gain power.
But can you trust that they will remain sharp for 4 years (or whatever the term of the position they're running for)?
This is the key to term limits right here imo
Her big claim to fame...
Getting republicans to vote for a more conservative healthcare plan than what the Republican candidate for president wanted to pass if he had won.
It's fucking disgusting moderates still act like that was the finish line over a decade later and oppose any more improvement to it, while demanding we call them progressive for it.
Although, once you're in your 70s, a decade probably feels like two weeks. Time flies when age related mental decline stops you from noticing the passage of time.
Hey, they had to get rid of the public option part and gut the bill to get some republican support! Ignore the fact that it was still passed entirely from a down party lines vote with zero republican support. They had to make it a shitty gutted bill for some reason. It was such an accomplishment forcing everyone to get healthcare from multi billion dollar companies with fat profit margins.
They had to get rid of the public option to get enough Democratic support to pass.
It was not a party line vote, 34 Democrats joined all the Republicans in voting No. It squeaked through the House, 219-212.
So, what you are saying, is that Democrats are extremely bad at getting their own party members to vote in line with what their voters want them to accomplish? Sounds about right.
"Getting their own party members" to vote for something is not as easy as you think. Just ask the current majority leader how easy it is to push around his "Freedom Caucus".
And the public option was not killed in the House. It was killed by Joe Lieberman, who was not even a Democrat any more. But he was the 60th Senate vote, he was opposed to it, and nobody - not even you - could have changed his mind. Consider that his final "F*** you" to his former party. So you can blame the people of Vermont for that, not Pelosi.
This could perhaps be excused if it was a one-off freak happenstance, but with Manchin and Sinema, it's obvious that the ol' switcharoo is intentional.
Manchin, Sinema, Boebert, McCain, Lieberman, and many others all serve to demonstrate that you shouldn't expect party members to vote together all of the time. Even if everyone in that list voted with their party >90% of the time.
It's not a "switcharoo", it's baked into a system in which representatives are ultimately chosen by constituents, not by party leaders. If anything, Congress was originally intended not to have longstanding parties or factions. It was originally intended for everyone to be like Manchin and Sinema. So like it or not, lack of party discipline is a feature not a bug.
Yet the republican party has no trouble keeping their dogs in line.
Are you kidding?
McCarthy is constantly trying to keep Gaetz, Boebert et al from forcing him out as Speaker. He wishes his caucus was as unified as the Democrats. As their leader, Pelosi watched Republicans turn against Hastert, then Boehner, then Ryan.
Reid kept his caucus of 60 together to pass the ACA, McConnell couldn't keep 50 together to repeal it.
Trump was constantly squabbling and calling out the Republican Congressional leadership. By comparison, Biden is best friends with the Democratic leadership.
The only thing the Congressional GOP is good at is obstruction, because that doesn't require any coordination. That's why they rely on the SCOTUS to actually advance their agenda.
Party squabbles mean little when ultimately they're getting their way. If anything, those squabbles push the republican party even more to the right and gets them even more of what they want. Passing the ACA was the best that the democrats could do with a super majority and even then it was a watered down bill.
But they aren't getting the legislation they want.
They failed to privatize Social Security, failed to repeal the ACA, failed to build a southern wall, etc.
In contrast, Democrats passed the ACA, passed Dodd-Frank, passed ARPA, passed the IRA, passed CHIP, etc.
Republicans only look successful because they had to drastically lower their bar for success. They don't want to pass laws any more, so it's easy to get what they want.
It's pretty obvious where the country is heading. You can pick and choose legislation, but the trajectory is clear. Also, things like ACA and Dodd-Frank were watered down trash. CHIPS was bipartisan because it was meant to stick it to China, but you're trying to rebrand it as a democratic victory.
No Republicans voted for it.
In fact, she had to work to get Democrats to vote for it. It passed the House 219-212, with 34 Democrats and all the Republicans voting No.
That was the joke...
I'm in her district. This has given me a possibly-crazy idea. What if I registered to run against her? Hear me out.
I don't think that I could win. She's been in the game for so long, I have no illusions. But, registering and announcing a campaign to challenge her might result in some national publication contacting me for a quote. I might be able to get a line in said publication and get people talking about it.
"Nancy Pelosi should get out of the way of younger generations and let those who came after her have a seat at the table."
I'd appreciate feedback on the value of doing something like this. Also, the likelihood that it would have the desired outcome. Also, thoughts on how this might be done.
I've been kicking this idea around since this morning when I first saw this. I'm increasingly thinking that it sounds like a good idea. Thoughts?
I think the local DNC would have to "allow" it. Otherwise you'd run as something-other-than-Democratic.
But all it would cost you is time, and maybe a small filling fee to find out.
I say, go for it! It would at least shake up the geriatric incumbents a bit.
The local DNC could potentially work against you but they can't stop you from running in the primary as long as you meet the requirements.
Awesome, that's good to know! I just assumed they picked if there would be competition due to how some Republicans threatened to "primary" incumbents that didn't fall in line.
Do it! As one of the most notable Democrats alive it'd be a near impossible task to unseat her, but maybe you get 20% of the vote and that's not a terrible result. After that maybe someone more notable like a Mayor or state rep would run and maybe win. Shoot your shot!
We need a competitor. Please do it.
have you heard of Shahid Buttar
Apparently, I had. The first two links on a search had already been visited. That's discouraging. Thanks!
He had a good platform too; a true leftist planning for the future of AI, UBI, etc. She just straight out refused to debate him. Then she ran a smear PR campaign on him just to be sure
Running in such a prominent campaign would probably make your life suck. Pelosi's seasoned team would probably go through your entire life with a fine-toothed comb and spin anything remotely negative about you to make it seem like you were a serial killer. The Republicans, meanwhile, might throw money into supporting you without caring if you wanted their "help" just to make Pelosi's life hell.
There are probably already real challengers who actually want the job who you could support instead. If you donated to them and volunteered for them, they might make enough noise to at least get some headlines. And, you wouldn't have to stick your own neck out.
Don't stop with her. Make your platform about Glitch McConnell, Dianne "The Wraith" Feinstein, Chuck "Touch" Grassley, and every other member of Congress who can't even claim to be a boomer because they were born before the end of WW2. Their generation built the America we have now; how's it working out for y'all?
Do it!
Here's what you do, announce that you're running, say your peace, and when you're surfing that publicity wave, announce that you're running for governor of California. No flaw!
I wish you would. Get your friends to do it too... "Nancy Pelosi Faces a Dozen Primary Challengers" might draw some more attention.
We need to put an age limit on political offices
I think we should also include term limits for these offices in addition to the age limit.
You can’t be president for more than 8 years, but you can be in the same political office more or less for almost 40? That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me lol.
Yes, term limits are a much better solution as age restrictions can be a slippery slope.
It would also make you useless as your term comes to an end. Political capital and IOUs are the currency in the capitol
Right, I mean those are the things we are saying are bad.
The culture of the Senate and Congress would need to change, and I think it would rather quickly. Unfortunately this is an issue both Republicans and Democrats will never support because the very people entrenched in power would need to vote themselves out of power. It will literally never happen.
Why do you think that term limits will solve it? If there's no seniority whip, what other motivation do they have besides corporate donations? I.E., take all the bribes they can in their short tenure?
Don't tell me more idealistic politicians will make it to the top. I don't believe that for a second.
I guess I'd flip that question. Why do you think being career politicians gives them motivation besides bribes and money?
Because that's the thing, they know they're running another campaign in a couple years, they always need to be raising money for the next one. They always need to solicit donations. And they can't do anything that rocks the boat because it affects the next election.
Presidents very commonly get more done during their second term because they aren't worried about the political impact of their actions affecting their ability to get elected again. I don't see why this effect wouldn't be the same for Congress and the Senate.
Can't we just vote for younger candidates?
Doesn't make sense to subvert the will of the people when they clearly support this.
Also, her age isn't what makes her shit. She's a corporate democrat just looking out for different rich people.
The problem is that this isn’t the will of the people. Preliminaries don’t count as an election so your vote for which candidate that appears on the actual ballot is just a suggestion.
The party committees gets final say on who’s on the ballot for that party to vote for.
Which leads to the problem of the 2 party system where we vote for the least worst candidate
Then vote for independents, or people whose parties don't pull that shit.
And that is the problem with the 2 party system. No one votes that way because not enough people do. Instead everyone voted for less bad option between the 2 major parties. Which happen to be the choices the political committee chose, not the people.
Yeah, you might as well not vote. You're never going to sway enough people to vote independent to challenge one of the big two, especially since the choice right now is between old people or people trying to establish a fascist theocracy.
Alright, then these problems don't get solved.
Now, you’re getting it.
You are correct. Voting isn't going to solve this problem.
Cornel West laughing…
Second least worst in most cases
You're absolutely right.
Collectively we vote for the representation we deserve.
Maybe in a true democracy. No more gerrymandered districts, ranked choice voting, and term limits would be a good start. Let's kill citizens united while at it.
In a true democracy, we'd have direct voting.
Which I'm a huge fan of. Not sure why we'd vote for people who won't agree with us on everything when we can just vote ourselves and get true representation.
I’d prefer a republic, what the hell do I know about complex foreign policies with the relationship between Sudan and Egypt, or which tax policy will spur economic growth?
That's fine. Just don't complain when the people you elect go against what you think is right.
Personally, I think direct voting would result in people voting for the matters they care about, while ignoring the ones they don't.
Nah, I blame the Republicans for most of the nations current woes since, you know, they tend to be behind most of them.
Plus, how can you see how the average American acts and think we’re still good for a democracy? We need a more fitting class of people to rule, as Adams and Hamilton envisioned it.
What do you think should be the criteria to be included in "a more fitting class of people?"
Some sort of an aristocratic society of intelligent men and women but that would be dreaming
Republicans are mostly to blame. Democrats are just the lesser evil.
Lo' and behold, evil is still evil.
It doesn't make sense to support the lesser evil when you could support no evil at all.
Aren’t you so lucky to be someone who can choose to sit on the fence and not suffer the consequences. Do you understand idiotic that statement is?
Jesus Christ, I hate to do Godwins Law here but just because when you have one side that is Nazi Germany that wants to dominate the world, kill all the undesirables, all that good stuff. Then you take a gander at the British; sure, they are a world colonial empire that deserves to be shattered but they are a democracy that DOESN’T dream of world conquest and killing everyone on earth, so any nonbraindead person would pick the side of the “br’ish”.
And you, over there just sitting there thinking “heh, one side has a small amount of evil while the other is the embodiment of evil so I’m going to do nothing.”
Sure, an extreme example, but the principal is the exact same.
Take Civil Rights, just because sometimes the civil rights people may be annoying and rarely takes a few things too far DOESN’T mean they’re the same as the horrific segregationists and the KKK, who’ll kill and lynch whoever they don’t like.
Please, grow and learn.
Imagine going “My choices are between the Nazis or the British Empire” and thinking the answer is one of them and not burning the whole thing down if that’s the best it can offer you.
You get what you settle for.
Calm down. I stopped reading as soon as you came at me with animosity.
If you want me to take you seriously, talk with less emotion and more logical reasoning.
Between their shenanigans in India and Ireland the British empire was arguably worse than nazi Germany lmao what a dumb analogy
You really are a dumbass, aren’t ya? Making an argument that the Nazis were all that bad.
I suppose that’s fair, any concession, no matter how small, will constitute a defeat to your side so you must stand your ground and defend the undefendable.
I really think we need to amend the constitution to allow a true democratic vote of no confidence for all federally elected positions.
I disagree. Fundamentally we have the final authority to elect our representation. Collectively we decide (and are ultimately responsible for) who is elected to office. Districts don't vote, and corporations don't vote. The people do.
It is the collective responsibility of those not disenfranchised or otherwise excluded from the political system to rectify those problems. Failing to address those problems (or any political problem) isn't a failure of the politicians--it's a failure of us, as a collective, to choose the appropriate lawmakers. Especially when we repeatedly elect the same people over and over.
I know it sounds naive to frame the system this way. But fundamentally the political system operates under the collective authority of voters.
Can we not be ruled by geriatrics anymore?
Geriatocracy
I’m angry at her, but more angry at the voters that reelect her. Get new blood into these positions.
Two party system that the party gets to choose who runs.
While that does suck, there are options in the primary. So you can vote her out without voting for a Republican, if that's anathema/unrealistic in her district.
Only if there is a primary. There often isn't much of a challenge to the incumbent.
Also, Bernie Sanders. If they don't want one particular person to win the primary, they'll make sure it works out that way.
Should be anathema in every district.
Fuck this horrible bitch. She fucking enriches herself via a marriage of her position and decision making with the stock market.
Fucking disgusting, no fucking politician that votes on policy should be allowed to trade stocks.
GET THE FUCK OUT AND STAY OUT YOU GERIATRIC FUCKING CORRUPT TRAITOR
Settle down, trumper.
Nothing to do with Trumper, he's right. Just like Trump should go to prison along with anyone who helped him on Jan 6
You agree with this crap that person posted? --> (GET THE FUCK OUT AND STAY OUT YOU GERIATRIC FUCKING CORRUPT TRAITOR) NO. He/she/they are NOT right.
You can dislike Nancy Pelosi and not be a Trumper. They are not mutually exclusive.
Yeah. I hate Nancy Pelosi. I hate Trump MORE, but I hate him more than just about anyone. Pelosi is still a garbage person.
Okay, but "traitor"? Let's not devalue the word by throwing it around at everyone who engages in systemic graft.
Sure. But the statement made by the user I was responding to was pure trumper BS.
I don't see how what they said has anything to do with supporting Trump, Pelosi is corrupt and too old. You should focus your anger on actual Trump cultists.
They accused her of being a traitor. Read the all caps portion of the trumpist rant.
She might not necessarily be a traitor in the traditional sense of the word, but she did betray the American people when she began to enrich herself using her position and choose blustering instead of doing her job.
If you think this hasn't been the norm among politicians for two hundred years, I have a skyscraper in Iowa to sell you.
Pelosi is only a favorite target for the rightful ire about it because of her prominence and her gender. That justified anger could and should be directed at any of a dozen others who are even worse.
Yeah your whataboutism is pointless. The crypt keeper makes plenty enough money to pay for real white knights if she wanted, no need for an online defense force.
Lol, I'm not about to defend Pelosi, just wanted to point out the agenda inherent in those who jump to villifying her before others who are worse.
Bullshit.
Okay, well hopefully you're paid well for spit shining those boots.
I'm a lifelong dem and I generally agree with the sentiment, minis the name-calling on his part. Her shady stock market trades are problematic at best, and we need young blood in the game. I'm hoping for a strong contender against her and I think many folks feel the same.
You're what's wrong with politics these days. You don't have to be fully locked in to one side you know?
f*ck trumpism
The fucked up thing is that people are still gonna vote for her. No one cares about corruption or acrually having good political leaders, they just need their team to win like it's some kind of stupid sport.
Blues and Greens...just like the Byzantines
Or they know how important it is that the Republicans not win.
It's not just about keeping score and keeping points for the red team. The blue team is currently fighting for white supremacy, christian supremacy, male supremacy, and to change the rules to make any other political party irrelevant.
If someone as wonderful as Mr. Rogers ran against Nancy Pelosi, but that person said he'd vote with his Republican colleagues on every important issue, his own personal qualities wouldn't matter. He personally might not lie, cheat or steal, but he'd be supporting a party that openly does all those things.
It sucks, but when it's a first-past-the-post system with 2 major parties, you mostly have to hold your nose and vote against the greater evil.
Because there is no corruption. Right wing conspiracy theories aren't fact
There's corruption. The whole system is corrupt and Pelosi is a whirlwind of corruption. Does not make right wing conspiracy theories any more correct, though.
"the whole system is corrupt"
Take off your tinfoil
Stocks aren't going to inside trade themselves! Get out of the way you old cunt. Hopefully someone primaries her and the people in SF vote her out. Still worse to have a Republican in the seat but jfc this is infuriating.
There really needs to be age limits on government positions.
Term limits, too.
Trading limits, too.
Well, I’d say some sort of blind trust. That way, the only way they can influence their investments is making good decisions for the overall economy. Toss in some restrictions to require they avoid boomer-chip stocks. (Ie, s&p500 type investments would be okay, but not msft or any specific company. ETFs in general are too…easy to get around though.
Yeah, I agree but the problem with that is they can still time macro events that affect index funds and ETFs when they know about something big before the public, like covid.
It should be managed and timed by someone independent and the trust just pays a salary or allowance on a schedule.
That’s the point of the BLIND trust.
They’re not making the trades. They don’t even see where things are. they can’t time trade’s because they don’t make investment decisions. At all.
They can still invest by dumping cash into an account and somebody managing it for them. Like the 401k managers the poors get :)
We do have age limits, but only minimum age. Any time there's a min age, there needs to be a corresponding max age.
But then again Bernie Sanders has done a lot to help "wake up" the minds of many millennials and zoomers.
He's also too old imo
And some psychiatric tests, to see if she still has all the necessary faculties for decisions. The cognitive decay is as sure as death and taxes
TOO OLD
another canidate question what has your past politics done for me locally? even nationally? if the answer is unsure or maybe some tv propaganda answer that was fed to you then why do they deserve votes
You don't think Pelosi has done anything to advance the Democratic agenda? I don't live in her district, so I'm not sure about locally, but I do think she's been highly influential nationally, and I personally think she has done a good job.
That being said, her district is safe Democratic even if she doesn't run. She should retire, enjoy the rest of her life with her family and leave feeling good about her accomplishments. It's someone else's job to carry on the work.
Well we sure know she used her position to advance her wallet
But yeah go off, defend this geriatric corrupt traitor. She’s not fucking special she’s a literal enemy of the people due to said corruption
Keeping it classy, I see.
She's not the worst, but as I was reading, I thought she was dead until I made it to "seeks re-election"...
That’s what the plastics are for.. they never die…
We need to shut down this senior center. I'm tired of this. Let's get some fresh ideas in this place.
Whatever happened to “just fuck off to your third home in the Hamptons and become a philanthropist” retirement path for these people?
She and her family rich af. Just pass the torch and support some other upstart. Fucking power hungry assholes.
muther fucker, get these old farts outta here.
HEY REPUBLICANS:
I'm as left leaning as they come and this old bitch should retire. This is one of the many many many differences between us. All you care about is winning, like this is some type of fucking football game, and I care about is what's best for our country.
Apparently not in California, home to both Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein.
Ugh get these dinosaurs out of office. I do not feel represented by someone who is a millionaire and over twice my age, they have no understanding of what my life is like or what I need.
We seriously need age limits for elected officials, it's absolutely absurd to have an octogenarian in a position of authority like that.
While we're at it, term limits for congress would be nice - 19 terms is absolutely ridiculous.
Didn't Ruth teach these geriatric roadblocks anything?!?
maybe US voters who should take more than colors and letters into consideration such as job resume over the years, what are they financially invested in, past examples of experience, et cetera
Someone fucking primary her ass
Her district is jam packed full of the most elite liberals in the country. They love her. She's one of them. Realistically, the only one who'd replace her would be a carbon copy of her.
"Liberals" meaning fiscally conservative establishment donors whose social views are centrist or indifferent at best.
Yes, liberals. They're all cut from the same cloth. Right-wingers who'll wear a pride shirt in June.
Careful now, the libs will start calling you a tankie ! 😂
No.
Boomers, agnostic of any party affiliation, have brain worms.
She is the generation before boomers: the silent generation.
Not better.
they are.
doesn't mean they shouldn't be doing anything other than enjoying their remaining years not running countries
Holy crap when I saw the headline at first I thought it was an obit
If she pulls a McConnell I’m claiming copyright on “Nance in a Trance.”
With ants in her pants
Oh fuck off with the dinosaurs
Wonder how her husbands portfolio has been doing since she left.
Any significant gains? Does he really have that midas touch without her fortunate position.
Lol the hammer attack would have been a great exit strategy. Oh well would you look at that, ever since my husband got his head beat in with a hammer he just can't seem to pick stocks as well.
I think it got hammered lately. Too soon?
We need age limits for politicians. I’d be more than fine with that being 60. But this skeleton is 83; she will be 88 by the time her term is done if she wins again. Nobody near 90 should decide the future of the younger generations
I'd make it whatever the retirement age is. In Australia, that would be 67. If we have an age where we agree it's time to collect your pension and live out your life, then it should apply to politicians as well.
No, we don't actually have this policy. Plenty of our pollies are over 67.
Wouldn't she be 86, not 88? House term length is just 2 years, so that term would end Jan 3rd 2027 and her birthday is March 26, 1940
(Not saying 86 is young, just want to be accurate)
Then the younger generation should vote and often
Well, if you want her to stop being in Congress, you know what to do in the primaries.
I'd vote against Pelosi in the primaries for the same reason I'd vote against Biden or Trump or McConnell or Feinstein in the primaries. They're all too fucking old. The average age of the Senate is 64 years. The average age of the House of Representatives is 57 years.
Here's every senator or congressperson age 68 or older.
That's.... eye-opening
Pelosi in particular isn't just old but is also showing some signs of seriously impaired memory at the least.
Trump is only 5 years younger, convicted of rape, facing 91 criminal felony charges and is running for re-election.
Instead of being anti red or anti blue how about you be anti fuckwit?
Trump was not convicted of rape.
Yes indeed he was. He was found to be GUILTY of raping E Jean Carroll
No, he was not. You are spreading misinformation. He was found to liable for rape. A conviction is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, liable is more likely than not guilty. This is not pedantic, this is the difference between decades in jail and not.
He raped E Jean Carroll -- period. You can worship rapist trump all you like. Go ahead.
That's not what you said. You said he was convicted of rape, that's not true. If you take pointing out a factual inaccuracy as worshipping Trump you're just as much a tribalist as those on Jan. 6
Technically right because it was a civil case rather than a criminal case. He was found liable for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll.
This is kinda the national form of the village elder.
Not American, but would vote Democrat.
What an absolute embarrassment. This is how to fumble your lead with young voters.
Democrats are a very frustrating party to be with. The alternative is 50 years out of date, racists, homophobic assholes, so you're stuck with democrats. So they put up the worst fucking candidates and we're just stuck with them because if we don't vote for them it's voting for some backwards asshole.
Worse is republicans think we love these people. No we fucking don't, get these old people out and get me someone who represents me. They're just the lesser of two evils
Skeksis need to retire, not collapse into dust while holding on to the royal scepter.
The land is dying, and the Skeksis continue to drain its life force
There should be age limits in politics. Such as retirement age minus minimum voting age. It would be 67-18 in the US. Make it so you can’t run again after you exceeded the limit.
Democrats and republicans are just looking out for different rich people.
If we ever want this nation to improve, we need to focus on independents. Party lines need to die.
Boy I was really hoping that headline had a different ending.
As a Dem, let me just say, please god no. We need younger people in Congress. It’s time to let go Nancy. I hope she gets primaried. Take Feinstein and Mcconnel with you on your way out.
"We are gathered here today to honor the memory of Nancy Pelosi, who-"
"Wait, no! I'm still running for Senate in 2032! I just switched to the Zombie Party!"
"...I told you guys this should have been a closed casket funeral."
Both sides are the same
Age
Can both the right and left agree to start electing people in their 40s or 50s for a change?
People need to ask why incumbents almost always win even if there are so many valid reasons for them to move on. The answer is pretty simple. $$$
Yeah, fuck these old, out of touch assholes who keep clinging to power and refuse to let the next generation come in.
Glad I stopped donating to the assholes a decade ago but fuck them all.
“Well I Think, I could use a good fuck”…. Pelosi maybe.
Primary her.
I'm a progressive. I usually vote Democrat, because the Republicans are horrible. Pelosi represents everything I despise about the Democratic party establishment: serving the corporate billionaires, and blocking anything that helps working people. Sure there are many Democrats who I support, but Pelosi is NOT one of them!
Not feeling great about this.
US politics really romanticizing elderly abuse.
If the money and perks are good, why not??
Her net worth is like $100 million, I really doubt she seeks reelection for the money.
Those insider trading perks are just too good to give up
If they made $0 for the rest of their lives they'd still be rich by natural death.
This is a high score run, nothing more.
It's the American way.
Her husband and his company profit handsomely from her insider knowledge.
She's trying to get to $200M, obviously.
Yeah, cut congressional salaries to $10k a year and see how long the old folks stick around. Eliminates career politicians, too.
Then the only people who can actually be congresspeople will be the ones who are already rich. Public service should pay enough that those who work in government shouldn't need a second source of income to provide for their families. Paying politicians $10k a year will only incentivize them to accept bribes from lobbyist and corporations, leading to career politicians.
Unlike today where they get paid so much they don’t accept bribes from lobbyists and corporations, leading to career politicians.
I never said that if you pay them enough then they won't take bribes. You could pay them a billion dollars a year and there'll still be some corrupt bastards looking for bribes.
What I was saying was that if you don't pay them anything, then it will be impossible for regular, working class people to ever become politicians.
Set it to minimum wage and see how quickly that raise goes up. Lol
These old career politicians don't become millionaires from their federal salaries.they have PACs and get paid to be guest speakers. After they quit, they get paid millions a year to be consultants or some bullshit title VP where they only meet once a year to justify "working".
Manchin has a yatch and he's from one of the poorest states. Boats in general are a huge money sink and this asshole has a boat with enough square footage to be a regular house, 1500.
Whenever I think of West Virginia I think of rundown early 20th century homes and barefoot kids in overalls. I know it's a stereotype, but check out that video. It's so sad that they fight so hard for the coal mines that killed 3 generations because it's the only steady income in the area.
I don't condone killing politicians, but I do think tar and feathering should become fashionable again. If you're too old to outrun your constituents or survive your chickening, you're to old to represent them.
hahahh its cute you think their salaries are where their money comes from
Usually these style titles are for deaths, and I got excited for a moment
DINOs out
She probably doesn't want to hang around the house and watch underwear hammer fights.
She doesn’t want to give up hubby’s hot streak on stock trading.
Oh for fucks sake!
COOL
Great
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GozmjcrcP3w
Ugh!
what a cunt. do us all a favor and die already.
Why was it necessary to include her age in this headline?
Because she's a dinosaur and her age is very relevant to the situation.
"dinosaur"
That's delusional talk
She. Is. 83. Years. Old.
And?
How the hell is it possible for her to be in touch with me a 40 something year old? How about those in their 20s? She doesn't represent us nor have any idea what it's like. It's impossible.
How you think this is OK is insane!
Because cognitive ability and reasoning declines with age after a certain point. Not sure what that point is but it’s definately in the 70s and 80s
a) are you a doctor b) that's ageism not fact c) there's plenty of 40 year olds in congress that are worse
American Dissident and unable to vote here WHY THE F##K DO Y'ALL PEOPLE KEEP VOTING THESE F##KS BACK IN ? IS IT TO HAVE SOMETHING TO B###H ABOUT LATER ONLINE? talking to y'all will definitly vote biden this fall because his name does not start with T sounds like Pakleds voting
Nancy Pelosi is awesome. Best politician on the planet and the fascist GOP are terrified of her.
We do legitimately have a gerontocracy problem and this doesn't help, but at the same time as long as she's capable of doing the job I can't in good conscience object either. The beauty of our system of government is anyone can run. You don't like her, run against her or STFU and quit screaming at the clouds.
You act like primaries are fair...
Even the DNC stopped doing that years ago, why do you still believe it?
https://observer.com/2017/08/court-admits-dnc-and-debbie-wasserman-schulz-rigged-primaries-against-sanders/
No, no. You see buttery emails and stuff, they never deliberately worked against Bernie to ensure Clinton won. Totally it was all the people voting.
brings up Bernie in current year
😴
Pretends the same corruption magically no longer exists
🇺🇸
if the dnc didn't like fucking up primaries, bernie's vp would be the front-runner in 2024. oh, and the country would be in a lot better shape than it is now, too.
i hope california can come up with a candidate that can challenge pelosi in the primaries.
I'm not saying the DNC isn't biased. But it looks like that was a legal arguments made by lawyers. Generally, they make every argument they can fit into their brief.
Conflating
Shahid Buttar was a very good candidate running against Pelosi. DNC wasn't happy and the idiot Dem voters from the District just fell in line behind the incumbent as both party's voters tend to do. It's just a fucked up, dysfunctional system we have going here.
Lookee there. The candidate didn't get the support or votes and lost. Therefore it's a dysfunctional system. If you added "and it must be destroyed" you could join the Republican party. Candidates lose. It happen every election.
It's a dysfunctional system because of the way it is. If you can't see it...well, I don't know what to tell you. I would love to get a pair of those rose-tinted ignorance-is-bliss glasses.
All I know, friend, is that the same system has worked for over 100 years.
True, anyone can technically run. But in practice, a fresh-faced new candidate going up against a well-funded incumbent will very very rarely win. The few times it has happened the incumbent either didn’t take the threat seriously (AOC), or the incumbent was involved in a big scandal.
For your well-intentioned version of America to exist in reality, we’d need to do a few things: overturn Citizens United, require that all elections be fully publicly funded, ban private political donations, and stop letting elected officials draw their own maps. Until then, the gerontocracy will go on.
You give me a dozen reasons why can't win. Maybe your the wrong person for the job.
Someday I'll tell you the story of 7 of 11 and Obama.
Oh I'm definitely the wrong person for the job. And I'm not running, see above.
Not sure about you but I don't have the time or money to run.
But you do live in the district? Excellent. Now get some support and raise some money. Make sure to talk to the party of choice. Get some petitions signed. You have to work to get on a ballot.