Thirty House Democrats are 75 years or older – and yet more than half plan to run for reelection in 2026. (Yet to announce*: Pelosi, Hoyer, Davis, Wilson, Cleaver and Adams.) Only Jan Schakowsky (80) and Gerry Connolly (75) have announced retirement.
Thirty House Democrats are 75 years or older – and yet more than half plan to run for reelection in 2026. (Yet to announce*: Pelosi, Hoyer, Davis, Wilson, Cleaver and Adams.) Only Jan Schakowsky (80) and Gerry Connolly (75) have announced retirement.
Honestly given that 2026 should be a major wave year strongly favoring Democrats, I don't mind Kaptur retiring assuming a solid candidate emerges. Hell, even a "generic D" given enough support may be more than enough to at least keep the seat competitive or even D leaning.
Are there no credible potential successors? I know we've had strong credible candidates in redder districts. Off the top of my head notably Dan Feehan and Jeff Ettinger in Minnesota 1st and Ron DiNicola in PA 16th, the latter which is far more conservative and where Democrats should have had no business competing in, even in the wave environment of 2018.
Just looking at that name I’d like to see at least half, if not more, of that list go to inject some fresh blood. David Scott is pretty useless and a lot of those names are backbenchers (Matsui and Garamendi don’t provide particular value to the caucus, as obvious examples)
Sadly perception matters more than facts to American voters, it would be wise to listen to them as Republicans have already done (minus Trump) since 2010.
Specifics? No, you’re absolutely right. But the “Democrats are old and talking about things we don’t care about” image of the party that exists right now in poll after poll suggests we would be smart to start getting more younger fresh blood into the hallways and social media spheres of the American media ecosystem.
I want to win, I don’t want Schumer and Pelosi (I know she’s stepped down) to be the image of the party and tbqf, if anyone here wants that to continue, then you’re not willing to accept that there are major issues that need fixing in the party, starting with younger, fresh, DIFFERENT leadership.
My only goal is to win and I really don’t care if that means tossing some reps out who refuse to grapple with the new reality of America today and won’t fight with their dying breath Trump and his aristocracy enabled by the GOP. Get out of the way if you can’t do that bare minimum.
How effective is Sanders outside deep blue America though? Not very. Otherwise he'd be President right now and politicians like him would be the rule and not the exception.
My critique was saying those people partly because of age, but also partly because of outdated thinking that doesn’t fit today’s America.
Democratic economic populists like Bernie Sanders always seem to get a chunk of voters that aren’t available to Democrats otherwise, because they view him as one of the few on the left who gets the issues that matter most to rural America (obviously approval isn’t everything, but there’s a reason he’s the most popular Democratic politician in Washington right now).
The people who feel left behind are given a voice and a different direction to that anger across the country: it’s the billionaires fault! Tax the wealthy! Fix income inequality! Trump has been successful because he’s channeled that anger that exists out there into the Democratic Party itself both times he wasn’t president, but ran to become president. If you can tell me one other Republican who not only got rural turnout into hyperdrive, but also won Democratic voters at the same time? I don’t think there is one as effective.
Have you ever noticed that every Democratic policy when it comes to economics is overwhelmingly popular among voters? Like 75-25 support popular. Far better than on any other issue for the party. But we don’t ever get near that vote and yes it’s absolutely partisanship, but it’s also old outdated ideas and messaging that doesn’t resonate.
The party is the most unpopular it’s ever been. That’s a verifiable fact. We can choose to admit it and shift or get used to losing to some of the most vile, horrifying people in the country. What’s the worst that could happen if every Democratic rep (except Kaptur) in Congress retired over the age of 70? Where blue state reps are all younger, more energetic, telegenic, confident and have a big reach into the party base exciting them to vote for Democrats. That is where the energy is in the party or maybe you missed the “fight oligarchy” rallies that drew tens of thousands of Americans with AOC and Sanders, that’s where young leaders are stepping up and making an impact.
1 quick question before I continue: What would happen if Chuck Schumer did the same? Do you think even 1000 people would attend that? But AOC and Sanders earned nationwide media coverage. You don’t wait for politics to happen, you go out and you create it. Every day. That’s how you get a political brand loyalty when people start to hear and like what the Dem reps in office have to say. The party is the people. Who we choose to represent the party matters.
They may not be as effective in legislation or procedure, but they’re probably going to be more effective in the areas Democrats badly lag behind Republicans right now like in social media, earned media, messaging that resonates. What is literally the worst case scenario if this happens? A GOP trifecta? Can’t get much worse than now.
That's very well stated. But do you think we could have a better young shadow Speaker than Hakeem Jeffries? He's better than Schumer, but I'm not satisfied with him.
Oh I’m not enamoured with him either, which is why I don’t automatically believe a younger person will be a good leader for the party. He’s viewed pretty much as a continuation of the same old Dem politics compared to someone such as AOC, which is more a mix of both.
Voters don’t like every issue she supports, but they like her because of her message and persona, the insurgent trying to shake the party out of a rut. Something different. People will vote for someone they disagree on many issues with if they like them, look no further then Obama, the last dynamicc media savvy Democratic presidential nominee and look what happened in rural, white America. Of course he was a generational politician unlikely to ever be replicated, but the point still stands though.
I’m not saying these people will fix everything or even that they are the only answer, but I am saying very strongly that I believe they will make the Democratic Party brand better if we sounded more like Sanders and AOC on the economy and less like Jeffries and Schumer. Jeffries is better than Schumer, but that’s not a huge bar to clear either.
Right, but the caveat is that issues or an identity as an avowed socialist can make supporting someone a step too far for a lot of people, and while AOC is loved, she's also hated passionately by many people (I'm a fan and wish she were running for Mayor!).
I agree. To just list someone's chronological age tells you nothing. Functional age might begin to be relevant. But if you don't favor a candidate you really need to find a persuasive reason--a bad vote, a deficiency in service. Otherwise, you're participating in stereotype and prejudice.
Emanuel Cleaver is my Congressman, now in his 20th year in Congress, and he's barely visible in the district (or anywhere) these days. His staff posts on social media, and he gives the occasional speech at places like the National WWI Memorial in KC, or at the IRS building, where thousands of employees were fired, but that's about it. I haven't seen him at any of the local protests. I think he expects to hold the seat for life and doesn't seem to think he'll have to work to keep it. He was a very popular local pastor with a large following, then became mayor of KC, (the first Black mayor, and a fairly successful one--a major street in the heart of the city was named after him before he was elected to Congress). He's a good and kind man, and some friends of mine who are local politicians know him personally (he officiated their wedding), and they think the world of him. Other than his years of covering for Sprint, including during the FISA debate, I've had no real issues with him. He's just not doing enough now, under these new circumstances.
Speaking of FISA, what a good time to consider that the telecom companies are most likely giving Trump federal government access to whatever communications it wants.
I'd say we still need someone like Pelosi even though I didn't like her crusade against AOC, without her, we'd get Biden and total devastation in the Presidential election with downballot GOPers riding Trump's coattails.
As Speaker Emerita, and perhaps the most powerful and effective Speaker in my lifetime, Nancy Pelosi has a wealth of institutional knowledge and strategic savvy. She also has the wisdom to stay in the background as an advisore after passing the baton to Hakeem Jeffries.
Ideally, the list would indicate which of these might be deemed safe seats.
Pelosi is doing good work. However, she can do most of what she's doing now without being an actual member of congress. People listen to her because of her connections and history, not because she's still in the house. Her fundraising would take a hit, and that does matter but at the same time it's not like candidates are strapped for cash the past few cycles.
If there is going to be a Democrat who will replace Nancy Pelosi, I would prefer it be either City Attorney David Chiu or another emerging politician in San Francisco, ideally one who has served on the Board of Supervisors.
I do think some generational turn-over is needed but I also worry about who would replace them. It shouldn’t be lost on anyone that the perception of Dems is pretty low as we are viewed as out of touch by many Americans. Younger, more liberal and more diverse candidates winning may be a deterrent to rebuilding our image.
Which, also to your point - it’d be better for them to retire and we have an open primary where established politicians would run instead of a race between an old incumbent vs a good looking bad politics nobody. AOC turned out fantastic but I wouldn’t count on other would be Squad members being so successful at politics.
WHO DO WE WANT TO RETIRE
Thirty House Democrats are 75 years or older – and yet more than half plan to run for reelection in 2026. (Yet to announce*: Pelosi, Hoyer, Davis, Wilson, Cleaver and Adams.) Only Jan Schakowsky (80) and Gerry Connolly (75) have announced retirement.
Who else would we like to see retire?
1. Maxine Waters (CA-43), 86
2. Nancy Pelosi (CA-11), 85*
3. Steny Hoyer (MD-05), 85*
4. Danny Davis (IL-07), 83*
5. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03), 82
6. Frederica Wilson (FL-24), 82*
7. John Garamendi (CA-08), 80
8. Doris Matsui (CA-07), 80
9. Bonnie Watson Coleman (NJ-12), 80
10. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05), 80*
https://www.axios.com/2025/05/15/house-democrats-age-members-reelection-biden
(LIST continued)
11. David Scott (GA-13), 79
12. Lloyd Doggett (TX-37), 78
13. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09), 78
14. Alma Adams (NC-12), 78*
15. Jerry Nadler (NY-12), 77
16. Al Green (TX-09), 77
17. Bennie Thompson (MS-02), 77
18. Zoe Lofgren (CA-18), 77
19. Kweisi Mfume (MD-07), 76
20. Richard Neal (MA-01), 76
21. Lois Frankel (FL-22), 76
22. John Larson (CT-01), 76
23. Steve Cohen (TN-09), 75
24. Joyce Beatty (OH-03), 75
NB. If you see someone missing, please let me know.
Definitely not Kaptur!
Everyone except Kaptur should retire, plain and simple
Everyone except Kaptur, yes.
Honestly given that 2026 should be a major wave year strongly favoring Democrats, I don't mind Kaptur retiring assuming a solid candidate emerges. Hell, even a "generic D" given enough support may be more than enough to at least keep the seat competitive or even D leaning.
In that district, that would be hazardous.
Are there no credible potential successors? I know we've had strong credible candidates in redder districts. Off the top of my head notably Dan Feehan and Jeff Ettinger in Minnesota 1st and Ron DiNicola in PA 16th, the latter which is far more conservative and where Democrats should have had no business competing in, even in the wave environment of 2018.
Ah Ron, I worked on that campaign. I even tried writing an ad for him to use and they ended up doing a worse FB video version of the ad. Good times.
We don't want a credible candidate; we want to keep the seat.
Just looking at that name I’d like to see at least half, if not more, of that list go to inject some fresh blood. David Scott is pretty useless and a lot of those names are backbenchers (Matsui and Garamendi don’t provide particular value to the caucus, as obvious examples)
I’d say at least 20 of them should stay. I don’t go for this ageism thing.
Sadly perception matters more than facts to American voters, it would be wise to listen to them as Republicans have already done (minus Trump) since 2010.
I doubt most voters are even aware of who and how old members of Congress are.
Specifics? No, you’re absolutely right. But the “Democrats are old and talking about things we don’t care about” image of the party that exists right now in poll after poll suggests we would be smart to start getting more younger fresh blood into the hallways and social media spheres of the American media ecosystem.
I want to win, I don’t want Schumer and Pelosi (I know she’s stepped down) to be the image of the party and tbqf, if anyone here wants that to continue, then you’re not willing to accept that there are major issues that need fixing in the party, starting with younger, fresh, DIFFERENT leadership.
My only goal is to win and I really don’t care if that means tossing some reps out who refuse to grapple with the new reality of America today and won’t fight with their dying breath Trump and his aristocracy enabled by the GOP. Get out of the way if you can’t do that bare minimum.
My problem with Schumer is not his age. Do voters have similar appraisals of Bernie Sanders? Youth is fine, but what matters most is effectiveness.
How effective is Sanders outside deep blue America though? Not very. Otherwise he'd be President right now and politicians like him would be the rule and not the exception.
Agreed, but you never hear him being criticized for his age.
My critique was saying those people partly because of age, but also partly because of outdated thinking that doesn’t fit today’s America.
Democratic economic populists like Bernie Sanders always seem to get a chunk of voters that aren’t available to Democrats otherwise, because they view him as one of the few on the left who gets the issues that matter most to rural America (obviously approval isn’t everything, but there’s a reason he’s the most popular Democratic politician in Washington right now).
The people who feel left behind are given a voice and a different direction to that anger across the country: it’s the billionaires fault! Tax the wealthy! Fix income inequality! Trump has been successful because he’s channeled that anger that exists out there into the Democratic Party itself both times he wasn’t president, but ran to become president. If you can tell me one other Republican who not only got rural turnout into hyperdrive, but also won Democratic voters at the same time? I don’t think there is one as effective.
Have you ever noticed that every Democratic policy when it comes to economics is overwhelmingly popular among voters? Like 75-25 support popular. Far better than on any other issue for the party. But we don’t ever get near that vote and yes it’s absolutely partisanship, but it’s also old outdated ideas and messaging that doesn’t resonate.
The party is the most unpopular it’s ever been. That’s a verifiable fact. We can choose to admit it and shift or get used to losing to some of the most vile, horrifying people in the country. What’s the worst that could happen if every Democratic rep (except Kaptur) in Congress retired over the age of 70? Where blue state reps are all younger, more energetic, telegenic, confident and have a big reach into the party base exciting them to vote for Democrats. That is where the energy is in the party or maybe you missed the “fight oligarchy” rallies that drew tens of thousands of Americans with AOC and Sanders, that’s where young leaders are stepping up and making an impact.
1 quick question before I continue: What would happen if Chuck Schumer did the same? Do you think even 1000 people would attend that? But AOC and Sanders earned nationwide media coverage. You don’t wait for politics to happen, you go out and you create it. Every day. That’s how you get a political brand loyalty when people start to hear and like what the Dem reps in office have to say. The party is the people. Who we choose to represent the party matters.
They may not be as effective in legislation or procedure, but they’re probably going to be more effective in the areas Democrats badly lag behind Republicans right now like in social media, earned media, messaging that resonates. What is literally the worst case scenario if this happens? A GOP trifecta? Can’t get much worse than now.
That's very well stated. But do you think we could have a better young shadow Speaker than Hakeem Jeffries? He's better than Schumer, but I'm not satisfied with him.
Oh I’m not enamoured with him either, which is why I don’t automatically believe a younger person will be a good leader for the party. He’s viewed pretty much as a continuation of the same old Dem politics compared to someone such as AOC, which is more a mix of both.
Voters don’t like every issue she supports, but they like her because of her message and persona, the insurgent trying to shake the party out of a rut. Something different. People will vote for someone they disagree on many issues with if they like them, look no further then Obama, the last dynamicc media savvy Democratic presidential nominee and look what happened in rural, white America. Of course he was a generational politician unlikely to ever be replicated, but the point still stands though.
I’m not saying these people will fix everything or even that they are the only answer, but I am saying very strongly that I believe they will make the Democratic Party brand better if we sounded more like Sanders and AOC on the economy and less like Jeffries and Schumer. Jeffries is better than Schumer, but that’s not a huge bar to clear either.
Right, but the caveat is that issues or an identity as an avowed socialist can make supporting someone a step too far for a lot of people, and while AOC is loved, she's also hated passionately by many people (I'm a fan and wish she were running for Mayor!).
I agree. To just list someone's chronological age tells you nothing. Functional age might begin to be relevant. But if you don't favor a candidate you really need to find a persuasive reason--a bad vote, a deficiency in service. Otherwise, you're participating in stereotype and prejudice.
Emanuel Cleaver is my Congressman, now in his 20th year in Congress, and he's barely visible in the district (or anywhere) these days. His staff posts on social media, and he gives the occasional speech at places like the National WWI Memorial in KC, or at the IRS building, where thousands of employees were fired, but that's about it. I haven't seen him at any of the local protests. I think he expects to hold the seat for life and doesn't seem to think he'll have to work to keep it. He was a very popular local pastor with a large following, then became mayor of KC, (the first Black mayor, and a fairly successful one--a major street in the heart of the city was named after him before he was elected to Congress). He's a good and kind man, and some friends of mine who are local politicians know him personally (he officiated their wedding), and they think the world of him. Other than his years of covering for Sprint, including during the FISA debate, I've had no real issues with him. He's just not doing enough now, under these new circumstances.
Speaking of FISA, what a good time to consider that the telecom companies are most likely giving Trump federal government access to whatever communications it wants.
I'd say we still need someone like Pelosi even though I didn't like her crusade against AOC, without her, we'd get Biden and total devastation in the Presidential election with downballot GOPers riding Trump's coattails.
As Speaker Emerita, and perhaps the most powerful and effective Speaker in my lifetime, Nancy Pelosi has a wealth of institutional knowledge and strategic savvy. She also has the wisdom to stay in the background as an advisore after passing the baton to Hakeem Jeffries.
Ideally, the list would indicate which of these might be deemed safe seats.
Been a while since I pulled this up but here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SZDvPXXQCp7cKeTtyYa9tMW2RSQbQbkADxrX-kAgWDo/edit?usp=sharing
Many thanks!
Pelosi is doing good work. However, she can do most of what she's doing now without being an actual member of congress. People listen to her because of her connections and history, not because she's still in the house. Her fundraising would take a hit, and that does matter but at the same time it's not like candidates are strapped for cash the past few cycles.
If there is going to be a Democrat who will replace Nancy Pelosi, I would prefer it be either City Attorney David Chiu or another emerging politician in San Francisco, ideally one who has served on the Board of Supervisors.
I wanted Steny Hoyer to retire 20 years ago.
I do think some generational turn-over is needed but I also worry about who would replace them. It shouldn’t be lost on anyone that the perception of Dems is pretty low as we are viewed as out of touch by many Americans. Younger, more liberal and more diverse candidates winning may be a deterrent to rebuilding our image.
Which, also to your point - it’d be better for them to retire and we have an open primary where established politicians would run instead of a race between an old incumbent vs a good looking bad politics nobody. AOC turned out fantastic but I wouldn’t count on other would be Squad members being so successful at politics.