Isn’t it ageism to tell someone what they can and can’t do?

I’m pro-choice, which means letting him decide for himself.

And who?

Sort of, and to that extent Sanders is excellent at that!

But I’m confused. Is this about what Sanders wants to do with his remaining time here with us, or what you want?

going on stage with Steve Fucking Bannon

I take issue with the way one framed this. It feels disingenuous.

He did not go on stage “with” Steve Bannon; he had a speech on the same stage that Bannon gave a speech on at the same event, detailing mutual if not tangential concerns about AI and its effect son humanity. That seems completely different than seemingly trying to imply they’re buddies or something.

Seems that while Bernie may be overextending the capacity for AI to be fluidly intelligent, I actually think he and his advisors are threading the needle very effectively in saying that, “Hey look, we know AI in some shape or form is likely here to stay. If it is, then it should be regulated, perhaps nationalized, and in the hands of public interests to be used for good – like combating disinformation or pursing advancements in healthcare, etc.”

Overall, across all issues, I think he and his team are pretty much on-point, and splitting hairs on AI is maybe a rare exception, not the norm – and certainly not an indication of declining cognitive capacity or age. But again, since our options are limited to 100 US Senators and non-freshman generally, I’m very curious who one believes the better pick would be.

Honestly, if that’s really all one has for dirt on her, that isn’t much to me. I think I’ll revert back to my aforementioned points as largely superseding.

Put another way, given her historical polling against Trump, I and any sane individual would’ve taken her over Trump or any Republican any time, any place.

Bernie never does anything he doesn’t want to do. I’d let him speak for himself on that, not us.

But he’s already a US Senator, repeatedly elected, and part of the most powerful chamber. The US Senate Majority Leader role is all about age and wisdom, frankly and little different than the duties he’s already fulfilling effectively.

I can see this concern for the President, but in this case if the worst happens, Dems can just appoint someone else. It’s Low Risk / High Reward.

The real question is: What can you point to that has shown his age with respect to cognition or position on current-events?

The second question: If not him, then who?

I feel this is exactly why Sanders is perfect for the role, though.

• He’s worked on bipartisan legislation
• He’s one of the most experienced, longest-serving members of Congress.
• He’s by definition “Independent”
• He is a visionary, and fulfills precisely what is entirely lacking by way of Schumer in lack of passion and willingness to fight.

The mere signal this would send to say that progressives are here to stay for the Democratic party would be massive alone.

That said I’m open to other suggestions, but the options are somewhat limited for experienced progressives who understand Senate rules and decorum and have relationships with much of the Senate.

I’d say that Ro Khanna or Pramila Jayapal in terms of seniority and experience and proven progressive streak should become Speaker.

For US Senate, I see nobody better than Senator Sanders who is actually the visionary who helped set this all in motion, unlike Schumer. It’s a perfect role and way to cement his legacy in a substantive way.

For both these positions, age is less of an issue and more respect, experience, and understanding of chamber rules matter more.

It seems that process is a little janky but it’s definitely the most viable path to get rid of the lazy / silent filibuster. This and ending the Electoral College’s impact to Presidential outcomes by passing the NPVIC should be top priorities for Democrats.

haha, bet you wish you had guns now in NYC! /s

Given Mamdani’s national stage presence, I think he’s destined for Governor or U.S. Senate. I doubt he’d push for a House seat, but he’ll always be a New York representative in one form or another.

If she doesn’t go for President, AOC will definitely primary Schumer. In a few more years after that she’ll probably make a run for President. Once she does that, I bet Mamdani goes for her seat.

Or better yet, ousts Gilibrand from her seat.

Because she terrifies Republicans for starters.

To your points, I really don’t care about whether she’s held governor or Senate position, etc. – there have literally been over a dozen US Presidents who held neither. Being First Lady for 8 years, Running the East Wing, and having the counsel of her husband as First Gentleman would be more than enough experience — far more than any of the other candidates I listed I’d contend.

More importantly, I am looking for charisma and moral integrity, which she has both in droves. Expertise can be sought by her hand-picked cabinet of experts of course. That’s what her personal team is for.

You’re onto something. Tulsi was compromised by Russia; Stevens by Israel

For President, sure, but what’s wrong with age with Senate Majority Leader? He has the cognitive capacity obviously and still tours the USA. Seems a befitting capstone to his public service and experience.

If the worst happens… They just change leader.

You also don’t really put freshman Senators in that role for a few reasons.

To my knowledge, not yet. But I never expected a word to be said on this notion until post-election celebrations settle. The time before midterms was to fall in line, but now over the course of these next months I expect there to be a focus inward as to the future direction of the party.

I’m telling you. Maine is full of shy, embarrassed conservatives.

Within the scope of the recent PEW Research typology, they’re at the very least a mixture of Order and Opportunity Left and Tuned-Out Middle, the former who basically get caught up in the security and immigration bullshit Republicans sling.

Honestly, I think I would bet mine, or at least half of it. There is no figure more more popular in the Democratic tent than her, and nobody who ever polled higher against Trump’s 10 years in the spotlight than her. While sexism is sadly a thing in this country, I think the Venn Diagram of legitimate sexists who’d refuse to vote for a woman solely on that is a circle with those core maga Trumpers who refuse to defect to this day and thus wouldn’t for any Democratic candidate, even old white male Biden.

Not exactly my preferred pick in terms of policy, and it doesn’t seem like she wants it but who knows. Her husband made similar comments in 2006.

I was about to say you’re completely right but something dawned on me. Let me know what you think:

No matter who is Speaker and Senate Majority Leader for the next 2 years, next to nothing is getting done, and the damage done by Trump will persist long after these 2 years sad to say. Why? Because there is no filibuster-proof majority, let alone a supermajority consensus capable of overriding Trump’s veto power. So the best we can do is limit the damage of Trump.

And we all know how knee-jerk reactive the electorate is. They’ll blame leadership come 2 years when things still aren’t fixed.

So what to do. Let Schumer and Jeffries ride this fallout, and then during ‘28 primaries, leverage this internally during the Democratic Primaries to leapfrog AOC to Schumer’s US Senate spot and have someone like – oh say Mamdani – run for Jeffries’ seat (just spitballing).

I guess it wasn’t a full 2 years ago after reviewing the dates in my case. Talarico had some emergent viral moments on the national stage when he and other Texas state lawmakers protested Republican redistricting efforts to skew House race outcomes (and what set off the reactionary response from California).

He threaded the needle flawlessly in resonating between AOC/Sanders/Mamdani-loving progressives, as well as more rural religious conservative given his packaged folksy charm. If I was to ever run for office, my platform and communication strategy would’ve always mirrored his approach (though maybe with a tad bit more El-Sayed bullishness sprinkled in appropriately). He frames wealth inequality and corruption within biblical context, which even though I’m not religious I respect utilizing the rhetoric for good.

Agreed, I think this is the way. It’s also somewhat self-limiting of senile geriatrics, incapable of standing for sustained lengths of time.

The lazy filibuster must go.

And that may be in reach, given we’re past tie-breaking defecting traitors like Sinema.

He’s one of the least-popular US Senators and continues to to trend this way. Meanwhile Bernie Sanders is the most liked if that’s any indication as to the direction Democrats must go. Yet somehow thinks he’s not the problem. He’s for nearly half a century with little to show for it. Time to go. Same with Hakeem.