Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t
The question is not whether she wants to win. She's not likely to be the nominee this time around at age 39 and a 2 term house member. No more than Mayor Pete at age 37 and a mayor of a city of 103,000.
It's a question of the future of the party. Do we want to copy the example of Strom Thurmond dying in office at age 100 with leadership such as Feinstein, Durbin, Pelosi, Hoyer, Clymer etc? At some point mental faculties decline with age just as physical faculties. Should the Chicago Bulls bring back Jordan at age 57 to play pro ball? Should the Celtics bring back Bill Russell at age 85?
|
What does Leader of the Party mean in this context though ?
I would argue that who ever runs the DLCC, DCCC, and DSCC are more leaders in the party than who ever is responsible for whip count on votes as they are actually deciding who to support in elections.
Those people are 52, 50, 47. They have the personal relationships on the ground. My thing is the age argument doesnt really matter, if it did, people would call it out on both sides, but no one cares about Mitch or