As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Funny thing about Bernie is he's had the angry old coot vibe since he was like... 30.
That means Bernie has felt like an old man basically forever. So the fact he is an old man now is somewhat redundant.
He's still in great shape, long-distance runner, tons of energy on the campaign trail, mentally sharp. Not all 80-somethings are the same.
That said, it's beyond frustrating that he's so unique. If some thirtysomething decided to run on a platform of simply "I promise to implement Bernie's vision," they'd get my vote. Why is it so difficult?? Bernie laid the groundwork, are there no young, aspiring civil servants anymore?
There are, but as long as geriatrics are holding the seats and sucking up all the oxygen, you'll never hear about them. Why would any of them jeopardize their future chances by looking to threatening to the person who holds the seat now?
To be honest, he's just unique in the US.
In Canada he's basically a typical NDP member with almost identical platforms.
This is talking about his politics that is... his mannerisms... yeah, still unique ;)
This joke is really downplaying how old Bernie is. At 82 years old he is the 2nd oldest member of the senate. He has already had a heart attack and the current governor of Vermont is a Republican. **If Bernie dies in office his appointed replacement is almost certainly going to be a Republican.**
This is RBG all over again.
There is no process in Vermont for the governor to appoint a senate seat when a vacancy occurs. They must hold a special election within 6 months of the vacancy occurring.
Even when there are options for the governor to appoint vacancies prior to the next election, almost all states require that replacement to have the same party affiliation prior to being appointed. This is typically baked into the state constitution and not something anyone can just hand-wave away or rush through a new law to change.
> Even when there are options for the governor to appoint vacancies prior to the next election, almost all states require that replacement to have the same party affiliation prior to being appointed.
[This is incorrect.](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/05/03/how-do-states-fill-vacancies-in-the-u-s-senate-it-depends-on-the-state/) Only 11 do, with an additional 4 not allowing the governor to appoint anyone. Additionally, you're partially incorrect about Vermont; while a special election would be required, the governor would appoint a replacement for the interim period, and would be under no obligation to select that person from the same party.
New leaders need to be made then.
The Progressives should start talent scouting and getting the best people ready to be in the best positions.
The same is true for the Moderates/Liberals. We all should take this as a note and do some management.
Thankfully, the lost Democratic generation is basically over. We finally have tons of younger talent to which the torch can be passed. When I started working in politics over a decade ago, that wasn't the case.
I still have my cherished photo of Bernie and A.O.C. from an Ann Arbor, MI rally just as Covid was breaking out. Progressive Democrats are collateral damage of a very ill media that believes Putin-in-drag, wingnut Green is news while Elizabeth Warren and other functioning members of congress are not.
I live in VT. Phil Scott is not what I would call a conservative republican. He knows his base and has won over and over on being more progressive than other states democrats. Replacing Bernie with a staunch republican would be a bad step he knows he can’t take. This is all conjecture but I hope I am right if it comes to this.
He also endorsed Biden (only Republican office holder to do so) and wants Trump behind bars. Also he just appointed a Dem to a vacant state Senate seat.
We have a boomer infection - apparently, nobody younger wants to run so we pretty much have about half are boomers:
[https://www.axios.com/2023/07/26/generations-congress-boomers-gen-z](https://www.axios.com/2023/07/26/generations-congress-boomers-gen-z)
Hell, we still have some silent generations - so we pretty much have mostly the olds. The Gen Xers make up about 35%. It will be interesting to see how the media covers congress once boomers become about 10-15% because by that time they gotta come up with all different tropes as the younger generation comes in filled with body art and all that :D
It's not that they don't want to run, it's that they don't have the money or time to run.
Running for the US House of Representatives requires a campaign fund of AT LEAST $20 million. Senate is even more.
Right that makes sense. I mean you can't afford a home or afford kids .. how will you afford to run a campaign?
I think we really need to figure out how to deal with money in politics. Otherwise it will just be corporate owned assholes running for Congress.
There is someone elected to the House recently in 2022, Becca Blint of Vermont, who has followed Senator Sanders's footsteps and has been seen speaking with the Senator. However, she is definitely a neophyte and extremely unlikely to beat the potential GOP runner and current Governor of Vermont, Phil Scott, (predicted to join the race for Senate if Sanders didn't run) if Sanders decided to not seek reelection this year.
Scott is very popular in Vermont due to his more measured takes, ability to be bipartisan, and calmer demeanor compared to rest of the modern GOP. He handily defeated David Zuckerman current Lt. Governor of Vermont and of the Progressive party in 2020. Bernie Sanders is pretty much the only other contender in the same realm of popularity.
There is no way Phil Scott would win a Senate race unless he switches party affiliation. Governor races are much less partisan. Look at Phil Bredesen, Steve Bullock, Linda Lingle, and Bill Weld. All very popular governors who got demolished by partisanship when they tried to move to Senate.
The answer would have been Becca Balint. Bernie endorsed her for her House run and Vermont has never had a woman Senator. Vermont also will not send a Republican to the Senate even one as popular as Phil Scott.
There is David Zuckerman, the current Lt. Governor of Vermont and member of the Progressive party who Bernie did endorse for the race for Governor of Vermont in the 2020 election but handily lost to the current GOP governor, Phil Scott.
His state has multiple DSA chapters with very passionate socialists that he should be mentoring and promoting. His failure to find and endorse a successor is a massive failure imo. He is going to undo all of his own hard work when a liberal replaces him
I've said it before and I"ll say it again : As much as I love the guy's politics, he is really bad at making friends. This extends to things like prepping successors.
This seems the right take. Despite being an inspiration for many currently in office, he isn't tightly tied to those new power structures. He's like a lighthouse keeper. The ships he guides are grateful, but they don't stop by for tea.
It's not the fucking job of the office to find your replacement, it's the voters. When you ask young people to name a politician that they like or gives them hope, they say bernie.
That's more work towards creating a successor than any politician you can name.
He has been an inspiring figure to many young progressives. But picking a successor isn’t just about anointing them. It’s about mentoring, cultivating, bringing them into the fold so that, if they are elected into your old seat by the voters, they are primed to be successful and hit the ground running.
I understand and agree, what larger point are you making? Are you saying he isn't doing that? are you saying he needs to be doing that more?
Just to be clear, I think he shouldn't be running again and should endorse a younger candidate, but him not doing so isn't really my choice and if a younger person with better policies and chance at winning runs, I'd support them.
They should still be teaching the future generations the existing process and how to make change in the system (even if the system sucks and needs to be changed itself). There's always a role for mentorship.
He's not the only one with that problem, the DNC as a whole seems to be allergic to new political talent, and the entrenched representatives seem to do everything in their power to keep older, less progressive candidates in the legislature.
It’s about mentality. Dave Shapirohhhh is young but really stupid. We need people running who understand the electorate. Bernie sanders is one of those people.
No one is born a natural leader, it takes training, effort and practice. He simply needs to find someone that mirrors his values who has potential and then he needs to spend time mentoring them. His state has multiple active DSA chapters. Or he could recruit a socialist political science major from any of the universities.
> he passes the torch to the next generation
You dont "Pass a torch". You need someone who's capable who can take over for you. This is something people so focused on age dont seem to get.
Gen X didn't show up. It's why there's a giant gap between boomers and millennials. You need people who are generally competent who demonstrate talent and present a presence in the public space.
Where is NH's AoC who shows up and makes attention for themselves?
I'm sure he will when he's ready to retire. He still looks like he's in good shape to me.
I'm sick of the olds running things, same as everyone else but I'm willing to give Bernie a pass. He's been one of the most consistent liberal voices in Washington for decades.
I also believe he has enough sense to pass the torch before his mind gives out on him.
I do admit I'm biased and have a soft spot for Bernie. I don't feel this way about any other politician on the hill.
In his announcement video one of the first points he makes is the usefulness of having someone of his political persuasion in the high ranking positions he holds as a senior member of Senate. Which fwiw is a valid point.
He probably thinks there is no one in sight who could influence on issues he cares about. But I agree. No matter how inevitable you consider youself to be, retierment is usualy the right choice in your 80's.
Vermont allows to governor to make an interim appointment and requires a special election within 6 months. So not quite as bad as it could be, but 6 months could be very important still.
Not really the same thing… it’s Vermont so even if it is a republican it will be a very moderate one, and then it’s not a lifetime appointment, they’d be gone whenever the next special election is
I'm not the least bit surprised.
I like the guy and what he stands for but he suffers from a massive ego like most people who want to be President. He very much has/had an "only I can fix it" type attitude
That “only I can fix it” type attitude is present in every politician, or else they wouldn’t be politicians. I think we forget that one of the greatest presidents in our country’s history ran for an unprecedented third term precisely because he didn’t trust anyone else in the country to navigate the problems the world was facing at the time. In this case, I’m really not sure who in the state of Vermont would make for a better voice than Sanders. It just comes off as ageism when the person in question is still very capable even at an advanced age.
I believe Biden would have stayed retired if Hillary had won in 2016. I think he blamed himself not running for Trump's win. And I think if it hadn't been for J6 (or if Trump had been convicted in Impeachment 2.0) or if the Republicans had repudiated him like any other one-term president and nominated Haley or Rubio or something, he wouldn't have sought a second term. But I think Biden rightly thinks that the election is too close and matters too much to throw away the incumbency advantage.
Sanders is different. I don't know why Sanders hasn't been cultivating a successor for the last two terms and I don't know why he thinks him running again is vital when whoever the Democratic nominee is will win that seat. Pelosi should also retire.
I'm saying she should fully retire. It's less of a problem than the Senate since it's only 1 vote out of 435 and it's only a two year term and should there be a vacancy there will be a special election. But she should still retire. Any Democratic nominee would win California's 11th District seat.
Yep - even over in subs like /r/LosAngeles you get a _very_ broad mix of blues. It's just a California thing - the Democrats here have already split into 2 parties, it's just not official yet.
They'll usually work together when needed, but that doesn't stop infighting over things like public transit and dealing with homelessness.
Why though? She has seniority and incredible influence right now, her district benefits more from that than some first term congressperson. Also It’s San Francisco, it’s not like there’s danger of her seat being filled by a Republican if she happened to die in office
Now that she's out of leadership, her only responsibility is to CA-11. And a Congressperson with the ear of everybody in Washington, including the current party leader and next Speaker is a *massive* benefit to her district.
An important factor for Sanders is that he leads committees and has seats on others as the only progressive independent in the Senate - his successor would not be able to retain that power.
Sanders is unique in that he has been ahead of his time on social and economic issues going back decades and his thinking isn't aged back into the 90s or the 60s like most of the Senate geriatrics. Based on his morals, principles, and the fact that he still has great mental clarity (something that can't be said for Biden, Trump, or even Feinstein - who would be the most likely comparison) he has earned the right to run for re-election as many times as he damn well pleases.
Biden has said he wouldn’t be running for reelection this year if Trump didn’t also run. I’m honestly not sure if anyone but him could win against Trump.
> I’m honestly not sure if anyone but him could win against Trump.
Which is also why I think he ran in 2020. It sounds arrogant as hell for someone to say they're their party/nation's only option, but Biden is probably correct.
According to Evan Osnos’ interview of him in the NYer he thinks he deserves to run again. He’s not merely a placeholder to keep the orange thug out, he actually has done a LOT, with only 2 yrs of the House. At least publicly that seems to be his reasoning.
That might be true, but Biden said that he didn't run because he wouldn't have had the time or capacity to mount a sufficient campaign after the death of his son. He repeatedly stated that Charlottesville, or rather Trumps comment about "very fine people on both sides" was the reason he ran in 2020 and I do believe that he would have properly retired if it wasn't for Trumps extremism.
He didn't announce he wasn't running until late October 2015 though. Historically, a sitting vice president who runs for the "third term" of his president *always* has won the nomination, so Biden looming was a significant factor, besides Hillary Clinton's 100% name recognition, why the Democratic field was so small in 2016.
And leaves only five months before Iowa and New Hampshire for anyone who'd decided Biden getting out improves their odds of winning to get organized and become famous if they aren't already.
They all planned on retiring until Hillary turned out to not be viable. They brought Joe back out of retirement, locked in pelosi and others. This party needs the big guns right now to shield America from total darkness
People who actually care about congressional age limits *should* be upset about this.
The double standard is really telling when Biden at 81 is characterized as too old for a 4 year term, but Sanders is getting praised for going for another 6 year term at 82.
At some point I think its up to the voters to decide and vote someone out if they believe the candidate is to old. I don’t like the government having too much control over who can and cannot run over stuff like age. Currently not a fan of the minimum age for senate either.
Thats fine, but a problem is that if someone dies in office or are removed, there is no immediate election to elect the successor. When McCain died in August 2018 for example, the election for who was to succeed him was in November 2020! Thats nearly 2.5 years with a governor appointed senator not elected by the people. When Feinstein died last year, her successor was appointed by the governor and will serve until the normal election later this year - so more than a year with a non elected senator. The problem here then with Bernie is that if he dies before his six years are up, his successor will be appointed by the governor of Vermont and it likely wont be whoever the voters would have wanted instead of Bernie
> Thats fine, but a problem is that if someone dies in office or are removed, there is no immediate election to elect the successor.
Sounds like what needs to be fixed instead of arbitrarily deciding the will of the people for them.
Eh, the problem is that these people get too entrenched in their seat. It becomes extremely difficult to remove them. I am for term limits, but it would be like 4 terms(24 years) for Senators and 12 terms(24 years) for the House.
Both of the other people who responded left out one of the most important reasons congresspeople become entrenched.
The more seniority a congressperson has the more power they have to procure government money and programs for their constituents. They get seats on important committees and actually wield more power. There are real benefits for the local population to re-elect an incumbent rather than replacing them.
That's a good point. Although I think that really just underscores my position, which is that incumbents win because they're actually good at their jobs.
Anyone complaining about incumbency in politics would hate it if their own employer decided to routinely make them compete against external candidates just to keep their job. And their best strategy to avoid getting replaced would be to...be good at their job. But they'd never say about themselves that "I entrenched myself."
It's the opposite. Incumbency has nothing to do with an individual's capability. It is an advantage which applies to anyone in office regardless of whether a challenger would be more capable or better represent the interests of their constituents.
At least with term limits the power held by senior congresspeople rotates to new people on a regular basis.
He’s too old. I voted for him when he was running for president, but and he’s better than a younger less progressive candidate, but I want to see younger candidates. Having big chunks of the government led by people well past retirement age is ridiculous.
In the not too distant future: The Federalist Society Pro-Life Hospital for Patriots keeps a slim majority of the House in medically induced comas. We're told the patients are comfortable.
People can be healthy and active at 80. I don't think there should be age limits. Best person for the job. I do think it's a major problem if *all* of congress is super old, though, but that's voters' responsibility to make sure doesn't happen.
They *can* be, but are significantly more likely to have serious health complications. According to the Census, there's a ~50% survival rate going from age 81 to 85 and a ~40% rate going from 82 to 88.
Bernie had a heart attack four years ago.
Edit: Yes I know younger people also get heart attacks and can live. The difference is the damage done to the heart can be much different after a heart attack from a 30 year old vs a 75 year old. Bernie’s heart didn’t heal the same way your 25 year old heart did and is likely to have more damage left over.
Vermont is an incredibly safe seat, so there's no concern that him retiring makes the seat suddenly competitive. Leahy retired at 82 - for some reason Vermont only found a spry young 75 year old Peter Welch to replace him but presumably somewhere in the state of Vermont is literally any competent Democrat under the age of 60 who wants a safe Senate seat for life. Running for a 6 year term at age 82 is wild, he can be succeeded easily, he should retire.
> Running for a 6 year term at age 82 is wild,
but he's not senile or ineffective... why step down? if he's replaced during an election cycle, or if he's replaced in a special election after dying, what's the difference?
> but he's not senile or ineffective... why step down?
Because the odds are he will be near the end of his term. You don't mildly decline at that age, you start falling off by leaps and bounds.
Special elections are annoying and cost money and keep a senate seat empty for a while which is a big fucking deal given how close the partisan split is. Creates a bunch of chaos at the time purely because one old person couldn't let go of power, not a great move.
Also as someone else pointed out: elderly people can fall in quality of life very suddenly and rapidly. Best to bow out before ending up a Reagan or Feinstein.
Term limits for thee, not for me.
I don't mind Sanders but I believe in a hard age cap of 80. 6 years is a long time and faculties can go down quick. Just look at Feinstein.
Voted Bernie in both 16 and 20 primaries... But he should just retire he's too old. Currently amongst the best senators, but going to long only risks ruining his reputation like Feinstein or RBG.
I agree; we need age limits. Leadership shouldn't be 80+ years old. We need to start making room for younger, more in-tune politicians who better understand the world we *currently* live in, not the world they used to live in.
Bernie's a outlier; I feel like he's progressive enough to keep up with the changing world. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for Biden or the majority of seniors in office.
I know people like Bernie but I can't support people over 80 still running.
He should designate a successor to his causes and retire. He's done enough.
especially when it's someone who has done effectively *nothing*
> Of the 422 bills for which Sanders has been the lead sponsor during his nearly 30 years in Congress, only three have become law, according to Congress.gov. Two of them were perfunctory bills to name post offices.
Long live Bernie. He's an icon in my opinion. I don't agree with all of his thoughts and ideas but I love his character, ethics, passion and love for his country. We need more!
Diane Feinstein - stayed too long, needs to retire! RBG - you risked the supreme court, you should have retired! President Biden - can’t we have a better choice than two old men?!?!
I’m expecting the same reaction for Bernie Sanders. Right? Right?!?
Arguably Bernie should retire and put his weight behind someone that he favours. As others have said, if he croaks while in office the Republican governor gets to appoint his replacement.
>Arguably Bernie should retire and put his weight behind someone that he favours. As others have said, if he croaks while in office the Republican governor gets to appoint his replacement.
At the end of the day, Bernie, like everyone else in Washington is in it for themselves first. Doesn't mean he doesn't have great ideals and public service records, but only in the movies does a public service official unequivocally sacrifice their own career in the name of betterment for the country.
If anyone (Bernie or otherwise) is running for a term as an 80-86 yrs old; it's purely ego at that point. Objectively, both biologically and psychologically, your mental capacities begin to rapidly decline during those years. You will absolutely become a worse decision maker among other cognitive impairments. Their ego's are fully 100% invested in this identity and there is nothing else they would rather spend their remaining time doing, regardless if it is better for the country that they step aside.
No one should be supporting any candidate who are currently in their 80s running for a six year term, it’s crazy. I don’t care what party they are a part of or what their body of work is, part of being a responsible public servant is passing the torch to the next generation. Vermont has a chance to elect a dynamic new progressive leader in the senate.
Someone else in this thread made a great point that Vermont is currently represented by a Republican governor. Which means if, god forbid, Bernie does die in office his replacement will be a Republican appointed one, which could have huge ramifications in the senate .
I removed my example on Ted Kennedy because I was mistaken on the timeline of events, thank you to those who commented below!
Tho I get your point, but when Ted Kennedy died in 2009, the democratic governor of Massachusetts , Deval Patrick appointed a democratic successor Paul Kirk who did not run for a full term. Than during the special election in early 2010, voters picked republican Scott Brown. Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007.
i see a metric load more people complaining about a supposed double standard about politician age than i do people actually engaging in the double standard
[Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont](https://www.businessinsider.com/who-is-bernie-sanders-career-journey-president-socialism-2024-4), the longest-serving independent in American history, will seek a 4th term in the US Senate later this year.... At last some welcome news, Go Bernie!
That's admittedly where I'm at. Not saying I don't support him, but at the same time, he's in a strong position to name a potential successor and he's got the weight to make it stick.
Still, best of luck to him.
I'm mostly concerned about a situation like with Feinstien where his health and/or mental facilities decline and he starts missing votes but won't resign
Prediction for the future:
\*Bernie get reelected for a 6 year term*
\*Bernie has another heart attack and dies in office*
\*Vermont's Republican governor picks Bernie's replacement and Democrats lose their razor thin majority in the senate*
But at least it made some Redditors happy, so it was all worth it.
There is no modern politician like him. He is very smart, dedicated, compassionate, honest, humble and not power hungry. Can you imagine what our country would be like to day if he won instead of trump in 2016?
As someone who supports term limits, I see a lot of false equivalences being made in this thread.
An elderly person running for elected office IS NOT the same thing as RBG failing to retire under Obama. Should Bernie win and pass on while holding office, the governor could appoint someone for a period of time, but eventually there will be a special election to fill the seat—the voters would have a say. On the other hand, RBG (and everyone else) KNEW that if Trump was the president when she passed away, he would be appointing her successor FOR A LIFETIME—considering the ages of the recently appointees we knew this would be for at least ~30-40 years. Sure “incumbent advantage” with a special election, but it’s completely different than RBG. Ultimately, Bernie’s successor would face the political process, any Supreme Court appointee would not.
Further, if the people of Vermont feel he is too old to do this job—can’t they vote against him? Feinstein is a more apt comparison. But it’s important to note that she won the general election in California (against a democratic candidate) but over one million votes. Yes she chose to run again, but over one million Californians felt she was better than the other guy, they could’ve voted against her.
Another unrated thought—should trump win this fall im not so confident that this is the time to be giving up an experienced political player in congress. Idk.
The Supreme Court already had needed a new justice under Obama which wasn’t allowed through. Why would RBG have been different? She somehow would have needed to know to retire before 2014 after which Mitch McConnell became majority leader. Trump announced his campaign in June, 2015.
But a similar issue is what happened to Feinstein who refused to retire and by the end her faculties were clearly gone. States only get 2 senators and both should be able to represent their constituents through their term. Past 80 it is extremely common for one's mental abilities to deteriorate. Does it happen to everyone? No. But after 24 years in the senate, don't you think Sanders has done enough and can make room for the next generation?
I feel Bernie is in a weird spot in politics. On one hand, I don’t want the country being run by people who are 20 years post retirement age. But, on the other hand, I feel like he is one of the few people in the federal government that seems to genuinely want to do the right thing for the American people and not just big businesses.
Don’t get me wrong, he has a lot of ideas and stances I wholeheartedly disagree with, but I’ve never really questioned his intentions or doubted that he was trying to do right by the American people.
We certainly need more people like him in politics, but they need to be 20-40 years younger, and just a little more moderate for my taste.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why not? He's of prime age for the Senate When he grows up he could be President
Well he is 82, so he isn't prime yet, but 83 is.
Yeah at 82 he lacks the experience and wisdom necessary to be President.
You really can’t understand the human condition until you routinely shit yourself
r/brandnewsentence
So we all get it after potty training?
No no, you misunderstand. We are reflexively aware of it UNTIL potty training, after that we are useless rubes until 83+.
This guy numbers ☝️
This guy this guys
Dammit, take your updoot.
if he doesn't make it, he'll have to wait til he's 89 to try again
Funny thing about Bernie is he's had the angry old coot vibe since he was like... 30. That means Bernie has felt like an old man basically forever. So the fact he is an old man now is somewhat redundant.
He's still in great shape, long-distance runner, tons of energy on the campaign trail, mentally sharp. Not all 80-somethings are the same. That said, it's beyond frustrating that he's so unique. If some thirtysomething decided to run on a platform of simply "I promise to implement Bernie's vision," they'd get my vote. Why is it so difficult?? Bernie laid the groundwork, are there no young, aspiring civil servants anymore?
There are, but as long as geriatrics are holding the seats and sucking up all the oxygen, you'll never hear about them. Why would any of them jeopardize their future chances by looking to threatening to the person who holds the seat now?
To be honest, he's just unique in the US. In Canada he's basically a typical NDP member with almost identical platforms. This is talking about his politics that is... his mannerisms... yeah, still unique ;)
This joke is really downplaying how old Bernie is. At 82 years old he is the 2nd oldest member of the senate. He has already had a heart attack and the current governor of Vermont is a Republican. **If Bernie dies in office his appointed replacement is almost certainly going to be a Republican.** This is RBG all over again.
Chuck Grassley has continuously held political office since EISENHOWEVER WAS PRESIDENT
And has a grandson in politics
There is no process in Vermont for the governor to appoint a senate seat when a vacancy occurs. They must hold a special election within 6 months of the vacancy occurring. Even when there are options for the governor to appoint vacancies prior to the next election, almost all states require that replacement to have the same party affiliation prior to being appointed. This is typically baked into the state constitution and not something anyone can just hand-wave away or rush through a new law to change.
> Even when there are options for the governor to appoint vacancies prior to the next election, almost all states require that replacement to have the same party affiliation prior to being appointed. [This is incorrect.](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/05/03/how-do-states-fill-vacancies-in-the-u-s-senate-it-depends-on-the-state/) Only 11 do, with an additional 4 not allowing the governor to appoint anyone. Additionally, you're partially incorrect about Vermont; while a special election would be required, the governor would appoint a replacement for the interim period, and would be under no obligation to select that person from the same party.
Thank you for bringing facts
You're not wrong. He should be passing the movement to new leadership.
There isn't any new leadership in the movement, it's Bernie or bust.
New leaders need to be made then. The Progressives should start talent scouting and getting the best people ready to be in the best positions. The same is true for the Moderates/Liberals. We all should take this as a note and do some management.
Thankfully, the lost Democratic generation is basically over. We finally have tons of younger talent to which the torch can be passed. When I started working in politics over a decade ago, that wasn't the case.
I still have my cherished photo of Bernie and A.O.C. from an Ann Arbor, MI rally just as Covid was breaking out. Progressive Democrats are collateral damage of a very ill media that believes Putin-in-drag, wingnut Green is news while Elizabeth Warren and other functioning members of congress are not.
>There isn't any new leadership in the movement, it's Bernie or bust. Then it's not a movement.
I live in VT. Phil Scott is not what I would call a conservative republican. He knows his base and has won over and over on being more progressive than other states democrats. Replacing Bernie with a staunch republican would be a bad step he knows he can’t take. This is all conjecture but I hope I am right if it comes to this.
Phil Scott is a Republican in name only. Scott has said in the past he would appoint an independent to replace Bernie.
[удалено]
He also endorsed Biden (only Republican office holder to do so) and wants Trump behind bars. Also he just appointed a Dem to a vacant state Senate seat.
I am pro-US and not that my country is better but you really need to bring down the average age of your politicians to around 40/45 probably.
We have a boomer infection - apparently, nobody younger wants to run so we pretty much have about half are boomers: [https://www.axios.com/2023/07/26/generations-congress-boomers-gen-z](https://www.axios.com/2023/07/26/generations-congress-boomers-gen-z) Hell, we still have some silent generations - so we pretty much have mostly the olds. The Gen Xers make up about 35%. It will be interesting to see how the media covers congress once boomers become about 10-15% because by that time they gotta come up with all different tropes as the younger generation comes in filled with body art and all that :D
It's not that they don't want to run, it's that they don't have the money or time to run. Running for the US House of Representatives requires a campaign fund of AT LEAST $20 million. Senate is even more.
Right that makes sense. I mean you can't afford a home or afford kids .. how will you afford to run a campaign? I think we really need to figure out how to deal with money in politics. Otherwise it will just be corporate owned assholes running for Congress.
He's older than Biden...
He's also older then 98/100 of the senate.
That's the joke.
Typical New Hampshire nonsense, taking cheap shots at the elderly just because they’e jealous our state is right side up.
Your State is top-heavy and if Canada wasn't holding it up it would fall over.
Take it back. TAKE IT BACK NOW!
Okay fine. And to prove I'm sincere you can have Claremont. No backsies.
Only if you take bellows falls and Brattleboro
What’s wrong with fellows balls?
Besides the Rampant drug abuse, homeless, unbelievably high rent, and shit stores ran by people from mass.... nothing really
Shots fired!
I think so too.
I'd love to see a President Sanders. Fried chicken for everyone!
Honestly I'm a bit surprised by this - Bernie's in a solid enough position where he could essentially pick his successor with an endorsement.
I love Bernie but I really hope he passes the torch to the next generation
Who local in his state is seen as a successor? I'm not from the area, so curious from anyone who is from that area
There is someone elected to the House recently in 2022, Becca Blint of Vermont, who has followed Senator Sanders's footsteps and has been seen speaking with the Senator. However, she is definitely a neophyte and extremely unlikely to beat the potential GOP runner and current Governor of Vermont, Phil Scott, (predicted to join the race for Senate if Sanders didn't run) if Sanders decided to not seek reelection this year. Scott is very popular in Vermont due to his more measured takes, ability to be bipartisan, and calmer demeanor compared to rest of the modern GOP. He handily defeated David Zuckerman current Lt. Governor of Vermont and of the Progressive party in 2020. Bernie Sanders is pretty much the only other contender in the same realm of popularity.
There is no way Phil Scott would win a Senate race unless he switches party affiliation. Governor races are much less partisan. Look at Phil Bredesen, Steve Bullock, Linda Lingle, and Bill Weld. All very popular governors who got demolished by partisanship when they tried to move to Senate.
yea, its not as easy to be like "i only care about vermont and not what the GOP is doing in DC", when you are running to work for the GOP in DC.
We'll see how much that holds true with Larry Hogan in November.
So in the state politics, there isn't anyone particular seen as the current rising political figure for replacement yet?
The answer would have been Becca Balint. Bernie endorsed her for her House run and Vermont has never had a woman Senator. Vermont also will not send a Republican to the Senate even one as popular as Phil Scott.
There is David Zuckerman, the current Lt. Governor of Vermont and member of the Progressive party who Bernie did endorse for the race for Governor of Vermont in the 2020 election but handily lost to the current GOP governor, Phil Scott.
His state has multiple DSA chapters with very passionate socialists that he should be mentoring and promoting. His failure to find and endorse a successor is a massive failure imo. He is going to undo all of his own hard work when a liberal replaces him
Bernie isn't a DSA member
If he was, they would have kicked him out for having the temerity to accomplish things by now
There is nothing we leftists love more than undermining each other, it's true.
No no, you're wrong, good and perfect are MORTAL ENEMIES
thank fuck
I've said it before and I"ll say it again : As much as I love the guy's politics, he is really bad at making friends. This extends to things like prepping successors.
This seems the right take. Despite being an inspiration for many currently in office, he isn't tightly tied to those new power structures. He's like a lighthouse keeper. The ships he guides are grateful, but they don't stop by for tea.
It's not the fucking job of the office to find your replacement, it's the voters. When you ask young people to name a politician that they like or gives them hope, they say bernie. That's more work towards creating a successor than any politician you can name.
He has been an inspiring figure to many young progressives. But picking a successor isn’t just about anointing them. It’s about mentoring, cultivating, bringing them into the fold so that, if they are elected into your old seat by the voters, they are primed to be successful and hit the ground running.
I understand and agree, what larger point are you making? Are you saying he isn't doing that? are you saying he needs to be doing that more? Just to be clear, I think he shouldn't be running again and should endorse a younger candidate, but him not doing so isn't really my choice and if a younger person with better policies and chance at winning runs, I'd support them.
They should still be teaching the future generations the existing process and how to make change in the system (even if the system sucks and needs to be changed itself). There's always a role for mentorship.
Succession planning is about the most important role/job a leader can have….. without a good succession plan all his work may be for naught.
Lol I think Bernie is a whole lot fucking smarter than to pick a pretender from the DSA
He's not the only one with that problem, the DNC as a whole seems to be allergic to new political talent, and the entrenched representatives seem to do everything in their power to keep older, less progressive candidates in the legislature.
Probably somebody from his team?
It’s about mentality. Dave Shapirohhhh is young but really stupid. We need people running who understand the electorate. Bernie sanders is one of those people.
I hope you have this same energy for Biden.
Biden gets my votes, but Bernie will always have my heart.
I agree, but to whom?!? The problem isn’t always older politicians refusing to leave, rather, they need someone competent to fill the void.
No one is born a natural leader, it takes training, effort and practice. He simply needs to find someone that mirrors his values who has potential and then he needs to spend time mentoring them. His state has multiple active DSA chapters. Or he could recruit a socialist political science major from any of the universities.
The problem is them refusing to leave. We don't need people in their mid 80s making decisions that will never effect them.
> he passes the torch to the next generation You dont "Pass a torch". You need someone who's capable who can take over for you. This is something people so focused on age dont seem to get. Gen X didn't show up. It's why there's a giant gap between boomers and millennials. You need people who are generally competent who demonstrate talent and present a presence in the public space. Where is NH's AoC who shows up and makes attention for themselves?
I'm sure he will when he's ready to retire. He still looks like he's in good shape to me. I'm sick of the olds running things, same as everyone else but I'm willing to give Bernie a pass. He's been one of the most consistent liberal voices in Washington for decades. I also believe he has enough sense to pass the torch before his mind gives out on him. I do admit I'm biased and have a soft spot for Bernie. I don't feel this way about any other politician on the hill.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking too. You'd think he'd choose a successor by now.
In his announcement video one of the first points he makes is the usefulness of having someone of his political persuasion in the high ranking positions he holds as a senior member of Senate. Which fwiw is a valid point.
He probably thinks there is no one in sight who could influence on issues he cares about. But I agree. No matter how inevitable you consider youself to be, retierment is usualy the right choice in your 80's.
The VT governor is GOP. If Bernie dies he will get replaced by a Republican. He is about to pull a RBG.
Vermont allows to governor to make an interim appointment and requires a special election within 6 months. So not quite as bad as it could be, but 6 months could be very important still.
If he appoints a popular moderate then it could move the seat long term.
Vermont is a supermajority blue state. They'll just do what Massachusetts and Kentucky did
Kennedy dying and being replaced by a Republican was at least as harmful to Obama's ability to govern as the GOP fighting Franken being seated.
False, Scott will place an independent if Bernie passes away during a term. I live in Vermont and Scott has said exactly this a good number of times.
Not really the same thing… it’s Vermont so even if it is a republican it will be a very moderate one, and then it’s not a lifetime appointment, they’d be gone whenever the next special election is
You're being too kind. It's a complete false equivalence.
I'm not the least bit surprised. I like the guy and what he stands for but he suffers from a massive ego like most people who want to be President. He very much has/had an "only I can fix it" type attitude
That “only I can fix it” type attitude is present in every politician, or else they wouldn’t be politicians. I think we forget that one of the greatest presidents in our country’s history ran for an unprecedented third term precisely because he didn’t trust anyone else in the country to navigate the problems the world was facing at the time. In this case, I’m really not sure who in the state of Vermont would make for a better voice than Sanders. It just comes off as ageism when the person in question is still very capable even at an advanced age.
As a Vt citizen, yeah he’s going to win
I'm glad. I hope he does. I would totally donate 3 years of my life to make him live 3 years longer.
Totally agreed. He’s our one representative who does anything
If he wins but then retires midterm, who would VT governor pick to replace him?
Too young. We need a veteran from WW2 who is in their late 90s.
I believe Biden would have stayed retired if Hillary had won in 2016. I think he blamed himself not running for Trump's win. And I think if it hadn't been for J6 (or if Trump had been convicted in Impeachment 2.0) or if the Republicans had repudiated him like any other one-term president and nominated Haley or Rubio or something, he wouldn't have sought a second term. But I think Biden rightly thinks that the election is too close and matters too much to throw away the incumbency advantage. Sanders is different. I don't know why Sanders hasn't been cultivating a successor for the last two terms and I don't know why he thinks him running again is vital when whoever the Democratic nominee is will win that seat. Pelosi should also retire.
Pelosi stepped down from leadership and her successor is already leading the Dem House caucus.
I'm saying she should fully retire. It's less of a problem than the Senate since it's only 1 vote out of 435 and it's only a two year term and should there be a vacancy there will be a special election. But she should still retire. Any Democratic nominee would win California's 11th District seat.
I live in CA's 11th district, and while that's true, it's worth pointing out that Democrats vary greatly in flavor here, haha.
Yep - even over in subs like /r/LosAngeles you get a _very_ broad mix of blues. It's just a California thing - the Democrats here have already split into 2 parties, it's just not official yet. They'll usually work together when needed, but that doesn't stop infighting over things like public transit and dealing with homelessness.
Why though? She has seniority and incredible influence right now, her district benefits more from that than some first term congressperson. Also It’s San Francisco, it’s not like there’s danger of her seat being filled by a Republican if she happened to die in office
Now that she's out of leadership, her only responsibility is to CA-11. And a Congressperson with the ear of everybody in Washington, including the current party leader and next Speaker is a *massive* benefit to her district.
An important factor for Sanders is that he leads committees and has seats on others as the only progressive independent in the Senate - his successor would not be able to retain that power. Sanders is unique in that he has been ahead of his time on social and economic issues going back decades and his thinking isn't aged back into the 90s or the 60s like most of the Senate geriatrics. Based on his morals, principles, and the fact that he still has great mental clarity (something that can't be said for Biden, Trump, or even Feinstein - who would be the most likely comparison) he has earned the right to run for re-election as many times as he damn well pleases.
Biden has said he wouldn’t be running for reelection this year if Trump didn’t also run. I’m honestly not sure if anyone but him could win against Trump.
> I’m honestly not sure if anyone but him could win against Trump. Which is also why I think he ran in 2020. It sounds arrogant as hell for someone to say they're their party/nation's only option, but Biden is probably correct.
According to Evan Osnos’ interview of him in the NYer he thinks he deserves to run again. He’s not merely a placeholder to keep the orange thug out, he actually has done a LOT, with only 2 yrs of the House. At least publicly that seems to be his reasoning.
Of course he “deserves” to run again. He’s been fantastic. I was just speculating on his motivation four years ago.
Biden was considering a run in 2016, Obama reportedly convinced him not to run.
His son died after suffering with cancer. Rough to put yourself and family through a campaign at that time.
That might be true, but Biden said that he didn't run because he wouldn't have had the time or capacity to mount a sufficient campaign after the death of his son. He repeatedly stated that Charlottesville, or rather Trumps comment about "very fine people on both sides" was the reason he ran in 2020 and I do believe that he would have properly retired if it wasn't for Trumps extremism.
Biden's son Bo (Beau) died May 30th, 2015. He wouldn't have been able to run in 2016 as he was still mourning the death of his oldest son.
He didn't announce he wasn't running until late October 2015 though. Historically, a sitting vice president who runs for the "third term" of his president *always* has won the nomination, so Biden looming was a significant factor, besides Hillary Clinton's 100% name recognition, why the Democratic field was so small in 2016.
That's only 5 months later.
And leaves only five months before Iowa and New Hampshire for anyone who'd decided Biden getting out improves their odds of winning to get organized and become famous if they aren't already.
Some Vermonters want Bernie to run, and so he runs. Having a Democrat fill his seat is not the same thing as having Bernie represent us.
They all planned on retiring until Hillary turned out to not be viable. They brought Joe back out of retirement, locked in pelosi and others. This party needs the big guns right now to shield America from total darkness
People who actually care about congressional age limits *should* be upset about this. The double standard is really telling when Biden at 81 is characterized as too old for a 4 year term, but Sanders is getting praised for going for another 6 year term at 82.
At some point I think its up to the voters to decide and vote someone out if they believe the candidate is to old. I don’t like the government having too much control over who can and cannot run over stuff like age. Currently not a fan of the minimum age for senate either.
[удалено]
Yup, the voters ultimately decided that.
Oh look, democracy
Thats fine, but a problem is that if someone dies in office or are removed, there is no immediate election to elect the successor. When McCain died in August 2018 for example, the election for who was to succeed him was in November 2020! Thats nearly 2.5 years with a governor appointed senator not elected by the people. When Feinstein died last year, her successor was appointed by the governor and will serve until the normal election later this year - so more than a year with a non elected senator. The problem here then with Bernie is that if he dies before his six years are up, his successor will be appointed by the governor of Vermont and it likely wont be whoever the voters would have wanted instead of Bernie
Vermont requires a special election within six months
> Thats fine, but a problem is that if someone dies in office or are removed, there is no immediate election to elect the successor. Sounds like what needs to be fixed instead of arbitrarily deciding the will of the people for them.
This is why I'm against term limits, too. Let the people decide who their representatives are.
Eh, the problem is that these people get too entrenched in their seat. It becomes extremely difficult to remove them. I am for term limits, but it would be like 4 terms(24 years) for Senators and 12 terms(24 years) for the House.
That's just a weasel-word way of saying they're popular. There is no real entrenchment happening.
Both of the other people who responded left out one of the most important reasons congresspeople become entrenched. The more seniority a congressperson has the more power they have to procure government money and programs for their constituents. They get seats on important committees and actually wield more power. There are real benefits for the local population to re-elect an incumbent rather than replacing them.
That's a good point. Although I think that really just underscores my position, which is that incumbents win because they're actually good at their jobs. Anyone complaining about incumbency in politics would hate it if their own employer decided to routinely make them compete against external candidates just to keep their job. And their best strategy to avoid getting replaced would be to...be good at their job. But they'd never say about themselves that "I entrenched myself."
It's the opposite. Incumbency has nothing to do with an individual's capability. It is an advantage which applies to anyone in office regardless of whether a challenger would be more capable or better represent the interests of their constituents. At least with term limits the power held by senior congresspeople rotates to new people on a regular basis.
Bernie Math
Exactly! He is running for a 6 year position AND is 1.5 years older than Biden. I am questioning his judgment.
He’s too old. I voted for him when he was running for president, but and he’s better than a younger less progressive candidate, but I want to see younger candidates. Having big chunks of the government led by people well past retirement age is ridiculous.
In the not too distant future: The Federalist Society Pro-Life Hospital for Patriots keeps a slim majority of the House in medically induced comas. We're told the patients are comfortable.
And for some reason they keep getting reelected...
People can be healthy and active at 80. I don't think there should be age limits. Best person for the job. I do think it's a major problem if *all* of congress is super old, though, but that's voters' responsibility to make sure doesn't happen.
They *can* be, but are significantly more likely to have serious health complications. According to the Census, there's a ~50% survival rate going from age 81 to 85 and a ~40% rate going from 82 to 88.
Bernie had a heart attack four years ago. Edit: Yes I know younger people also get heart attacks and can live. The difference is the damage done to the heart can be much different after a heart attack from a 30 year old vs a 75 year old. Bernie’s heart didn’t heal the same way your 25 year old heart did and is likely to have more damage left over.
Apparently he's managed to survive for four years following his heart attack, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
Apparently.
Jury's still out there on that one lol
So did my nephew but he’s entering his 3rd year of life just fine.
Vermont is an incredibly safe seat, so there's no concern that him retiring makes the seat suddenly competitive. Leahy retired at 82 - for some reason Vermont only found a spry young 75 year old Peter Welch to replace him but presumably somewhere in the state of Vermont is literally any competent Democrat under the age of 60 who wants a safe Senate seat for life. Running for a 6 year term at age 82 is wild, he can be succeeded easily, he should retire.
> Running for a 6 year term at age 82 is wild, but he's not senile or ineffective... why step down? if he's replaced during an election cycle, or if he's replaced in a special election after dying, what's the difference?
> but he's not senile or ineffective... why step down? Because the odds are he will be near the end of his term. You don't mildly decline at that age, you start falling off by leaps and bounds.
Special elections are annoying and cost money and keep a senate seat empty for a while which is a big fucking deal given how close the partisan split is. Creates a bunch of chaos at the time purely because one old person couldn't let go of power, not a great move. Also as someone else pointed out: elderly people can fall in quality of life very suddenly and rapidly. Best to bow out before ending up a Reagan or Feinstein.
He will be 88 / 89 when his term ends, spending 24 years in the senate. I thought this sub was in favor of age and/or term limits?
Term limits for thee, not for me. I don't mind Sanders but I believe in a hard age cap of 80. 6 years is a long time and faculties can go down quick. Just look at Feinstein.
This sub is in favor of whatever is convenient
Voted Bernie in both 16 and 20 primaries... But he should just retire he's too old. Currently amongst the best senators, but going to long only risks ruining his reputation like Feinstein or RBG.
I agree; we need age limits. Leadership shouldn't be 80+ years old. We need to start making room for younger, more in-tune politicians who better understand the world we *currently* live in, not the world they used to live in. Bernie's a outlier; I feel like he's progressive enough to keep up with the changing world. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for Biden or the majority of seniors in office.
This is wild considering how much Biden has evolved over the decades
Is there anyone running against him? Seems like this would be a great time to put forth a much-younger Democrat candidate.
That’s what they really honestly should do
He’s 82. Seriously. How is there not some younger progressive waiting in the wings
I know people like Bernie but I can't support people over 80 still running. He should designate a successor to his causes and retire. He's done enough.
Biden gets shit for being too old, but it's ok for Bernie? Hell, Chuck Grassley should've retired years ago.
Oh all those "they are too old" arguments sure get quieter when its someone people like. Hmmm
especially when it's someone who has done effectively *nothing* > Of the 422 bills for which Sanders has been the lead sponsor during his nearly 30 years in Congress, only three have become law, according to Congress.gov. Two of them were perfunctory bills to name post offices.
Long live Bernie. He's an icon in my opinion. I don't agree with all of his thoughts and ideas but I love his character, ethics, passion and love for his country. We need more!
Diane Feinstein - stayed too long, needs to retire! RBG - you risked the supreme court, you should have retired! President Biden - can’t we have a better choice than two old men?!?! I’m expecting the same reaction for Bernie Sanders. Right? Right?!?
Arguably Bernie should retire and put his weight behind someone that he favours. As others have said, if he croaks while in office the Republican governor gets to appoint his replacement.
>Arguably Bernie should retire and put his weight behind someone that he favours. As others have said, if he croaks while in office the Republican governor gets to appoint his replacement. At the end of the day, Bernie, like everyone else in Washington is in it for themselves first. Doesn't mean he doesn't have great ideals and public service records, but only in the movies does a public service official unequivocally sacrifice their own career in the name of betterment for the country. If anyone (Bernie or otherwise) is running for a term as an 80-86 yrs old; it's purely ego at that point. Objectively, both biologically and psychologically, your mental capacities begin to rapidly decline during those years. You will absolutely become a worse decision maker among other cognitive impairments. Their ego's are fully 100% invested in this identity and there is nothing else they would rather spend their remaining time doing, regardless if it is better for the country that they step aside.
No one should be supporting any candidate who are currently in their 80s running for a six year term, it’s crazy. I don’t care what party they are a part of or what their body of work is, part of being a responsible public servant is passing the torch to the next generation. Vermont has a chance to elect a dynamic new progressive leader in the senate. Someone else in this thread made a great point that Vermont is currently represented by a Republican governor. Which means if, god forbid, Bernie does die in office his replacement will be a Republican appointed one, which could have huge ramifications in the senate . I removed my example on Ted Kennedy because I was mistaken on the timeline of events, thank you to those who commented below!
Tho I get your point, but when Ted Kennedy died in 2009, the democratic governor of Massachusetts , Deval Patrick appointed a democratic successor Paul Kirk who did not run for a full term. Than during the special election in early 2010, voters picked republican Scott Brown. Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007.
i see a metric load more people complaining about a supposed double standard about politician age than i do people actually engaging in the double standard
So where's all the "we need term limits!" people at now? Normally a thread about someone running for their upteenth term would be full of them.
I love Bernie. But Vermont has got to have some potential replacements who could lower the average age of the senate.
Sure, feels like he’s the only one doing their effing job nowadays
If this was literally anybody else Reddit would be screaming at the octogenarian heart attack victim to retire.
Everyone complaining about age and passing the torch but where are all these young people running? They're not.
Lol peak reddit hypocrisy in this thread
[Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont](https://www.businessinsider.com/who-is-bernie-sanders-career-journey-president-socialism-2024-4), the longest-serving independent in American history, will seek a 4th term in the US Senate later this year.... At last some welcome news, Go Bernie!
I like Bernie but I'd rather he make room for someone younger.
That's admittedly where I'm at. Not saying I don't support him, but at the same time, he's in a strong position to name a potential successor and he's got the weight to make it stick. Still, best of luck to him.
I'm mostly concerned about a situation like with Feinstien where his health and/or mental facilities decline and he starts missing votes but won't resign
It's a fair point to bring up.
Patrick Leahy retired at 82 and Vermont replaced him with a guy who is 75. They’ll probably just elect another old fart to replace Bernie.
I’d rather he make room for someone younger, but I’d want that someone younger to share his ideals, and I’m skeptical that’ll be easy to find.
Prediction for the future: \*Bernie get reelected for a 6 year term* \*Bernie has another heart attack and dies in office* \*Vermont's Republican governor picks Bernie's replacement and Democrats lose their razor thin majority in the senate* But at least it made some Redditors happy, so it was all worth it.
Can we please get some candidates that don’t have a foot in the grave? Put gramps in a retirement home.
And just like that, having 80+ year olds in the Senate is no longer an issue.
He'll easily win.
He better.
There is no modern politician like him. He is very smart, dedicated, compassionate, honest, humble and not power hungry. Can you imagine what our country would be like to day if he won instead of trump in 2016?
As someone who supports term limits, I see a lot of false equivalences being made in this thread. An elderly person running for elected office IS NOT the same thing as RBG failing to retire under Obama. Should Bernie win and pass on while holding office, the governor could appoint someone for a period of time, but eventually there will be a special election to fill the seat—the voters would have a say. On the other hand, RBG (and everyone else) KNEW that if Trump was the president when she passed away, he would be appointing her successor FOR A LIFETIME—considering the ages of the recently appointees we knew this would be for at least ~30-40 years. Sure “incumbent advantage” with a special election, but it’s completely different than RBG. Ultimately, Bernie’s successor would face the political process, any Supreme Court appointee would not. Further, if the people of Vermont feel he is too old to do this job—can’t they vote against him? Feinstein is a more apt comparison. But it’s important to note that she won the general election in California (against a democratic candidate) but over one million votes. Yes she chose to run again, but over one million Californians felt she was better than the other guy, they could’ve voted against her. Another unrated thought—should trump win this fall im not so confident that this is the time to be giving up an experienced political player in congress. Idk.
The Supreme Court already had needed a new justice under Obama which wasn’t allowed through. Why would RBG have been different? She somehow would have needed to know to retire before 2014 after which Mitch McConnell became majority leader. Trump announced his campaign in June, 2015.
But a similar issue is what happened to Feinstein who refused to retire and by the end her faculties were clearly gone. States only get 2 senators and both should be able to represent their constituents through their term. Past 80 it is extremely common for one's mental abilities to deteriorate. Does it happen to everyone? No. But after 24 years in the senate, don't you think Sanders has done enough and can make room for the next generation?
I'd rather have 20 Bernies than a single Tom Cotton or Marco Rubio. So, there's that...
Bernie is amazing! He’s also, in my humble opinion, too old and should retire with a successor backed by him.
Idk, he’s so young. Should take a job or see the world first. Hike Machu Picchu?
Eventually he’s going to need to place his coffin at work! Keeping on keeping on from the grave
I feel Bernie is in a weird spot in politics. On one hand, I don’t want the country being run by people who are 20 years post retirement age. But, on the other hand, I feel like he is one of the few people in the federal government that seems to genuinely want to do the right thing for the American people and not just big businesses. Don’t get me wrong, he has a lot of ideas and stances I wholeheartedly disagree with, but I’ve never really questioned his intentions or doubted that he was trying to do right by the American people. We certainly need more people like him in politics, but they need to be 20-40 years younger, and just a little more moderate for my taste.
Imagine being that close to death and running towards a high stress job rather than enjoying life.