Not necessarily an age restriction. We hear all the time about how old the party is and I was just curious to see it broken down into just how old it was and I found it to be quite interesting. 113 Reps are over 55. 55 are over 70 and 11 are 80 or older. Now that doesn't mean that everyone is treated the same but I think it would send a …
Not necessarily an age restriction. We hear all the time about how old the party is and I was just curious to see it broken down into just how old it was and I found it to be quite interesting. 113 Reps are over 55. 55 are over 70 and 11 are 80 or older. Now that doesn't mean that everyone is treated the same but I think it would send a huge message if they either stepped down willingly or were taken down via a primary.
55 is not old at all. I support primarying out overly right-wing or timid Democrats when that is likely to result in moving the seats in question further left, rather than losing them to Republicans, but trying to purge the party based on age starting at 55 would be ludicrous and stupid, in my opinion.
I didn't say it was. That's just the cutoff that I decided on and there are bigger fish to fry than those that are 55. I'm also looking at what their primary vote share was, what their district vote share was, where they fall ideologically, and how long they've been in office. Anyone from the 1900s in a 60+% district I think should be primaried at the very least. For example Doris Matsui and her husband have represented a California congressional district going back to 1979. She's 80 years old and her district voted for her with over 66% of the vote. I think she's someone who should be primaried if she doesn't retire.
Not necessarily an age restriction. We hear all the time about how old the party is and I was just curious to see it broken down into just how old it was and I found it to be quite interesting. 113 Reps are over 55. 55 are over 70 and 11 are 80 or older. Now that doesn't mean that everyone is treated the same but I think it would send a huge message if they either stepped down willingly or were taken down via a primary.
55 is not old at all. I support primarying out overly right-wing or timid Democrats when that is likely to result in moving the seats in question further left, rather than losing them to Republicans, but trying to purge the party based on age starting at 55 would be ludicrous and stupid, in my opinion.
I didn't say it was. That's just the cutoff that I decided on and there are bigger fish to fry than those that are 55. I'm also looking at what their primary vote share was, what their district vote share was, where they fall ideologically, and how long they've been in office. Anyone from the 1900s in a 60+% district I think should be primaried at the very least. For example Doris Matsui and her husband have represented a California congressional district going back to 1979. She's 80 years old and her district voted for her with over 66% of the vote. I think she's someone who should be primaried if she doesn't retire.
Anyone from the 1900s. That means people over 25. Hahahahahah
Democrats have a problem with younger voters and noncollege younger voters in particular, but the solution isn't to descend into blatant ageism.