I feel like talking about Biden makes it seem like it's a uniquely Biden problem. It really isn't. It's something his entire generation has utterly refused to do, which is accept their mortality and step aside.
RBG died in office despite everyone knowing that she should have stepped down long before. Pelosi and Schumer have held their gav…
I feel like talking about Biden makes it seem like it's a uniquely Biden problem. It really isn't. It's something his entire generation has utterly refused to do, which is accept their mortality and step aside.
RBG died in office despite everyone knowing that she should have stepped down long before. Pelosi and Schumer have held their gavels so long that an entire political generation went into the private sector during the Obama years. But the most obvious to me was the Dianne Feinstein stuff.
For those unaware, she was basically brain dead for a long time, unable to do her job, unable to vote or get around on her own, and instead of stepping down and having a replacement put in place, questions about her age and health were treated as scandalous. All the while, she was moved around like it was weekend at bernies.
It was really gross! But it's also par for the course for the boomer generation of politicians. They utterly refuse to accept their age and mortality, and their handlers keep them around far too long.
But Biden trying to go out 'one more time' and 'set the record straight' is the same thing that Trump does, and it's like a punch drunk boxer who thinks he still has it and going out there and losing over and over.
It's sad. it's pathetic. Politics aside, his time is over, and he refuses to let anyone else have the last word, even though other people will always have the last word after he dies. Someone else always gets the last word.
Maybe it wouldn't have mattered, maybe that's true. But it's also irrelevant. The contest is over. He has no business in politics, and we shouldn't act like his words have any relevance. I felt the same about Hillary Clinton after she lost in 2016. Whatever the merits, it's over. Move on. We never need to hear from you again, because you are no longer relevant to the conversation moving forward.
And of all the things that the boomer generation of politicians hates to accept, it's that they are no longer relevant culturally or politically. Voters might hold sway, yes. But the politicians need to accept that they're in the twilight of their lives, and government is not a jobs program for old people.
The boomer generation is defined as those born between 1945 and 1965. Biden was born in 1942, Polosi in 1940, RBG in 1933. Someone born in 1959 would be a boomer and in their 60’s. Gov Pritzker was born in 1965 on the cusp of boomer and GenX. I agree with some of your concerns, but would also like to see a bit more precision in your use of generational terminology. Your central examples are not boomers. That said, the Clintons fall squarely in the boomer generation. I myself am on the cusp of boomer and the silent generation.
I believe former presidents are uniquely qualified to raise their voices and warn the American people if the country is taking a dangerous turn. Hopefully Democrats will remain the "Big Tent" party and there will always be a place at the table for all of us.
I don't really disagree with your sentiment, but there is also something to be said for the elder statesmen in either party stepping up and saying "hey, this isn't right" when we go off the rails.
I think Biden needs to go away, but where' Bush defending his PEPFAR program, or Obama helping to rally the next generation? I would think their legacies should matter to them.
If you're past the age of 70, it's ok to take your hands off the reins and coach up the next generation or work as an advisor. When the decline comes, it's usually pretty fast. I also think taking yourself to the talk show circuit in some Don Quixote attempt to set the record straight is a waste of everyone's time.
I agree with a lot of what you have said, but it’s not a problem particular to Boomers (full disclosure, I am one). I grew up in SC with Strom Thurmond as my Senator for as long as I could remember. NC had Jesse Helms. Not Boomers at all. But aside from blaming one generation in particular, I agree that it’s not helpful for Biden or HRC to say a word.
As a boomer myself, I agree. I voted for Biden in 2020 of course, but I really wanted a younger president. Actually Kamala Harris was my pick back then and naturally I voted for her in 2024. We need new, younger blood.
I genuinely like my Senators, I think they do good work MOST of the time. Once a month I call their offices and ask that they find people to mentor that could run to replace them. And if they can’t bring themselves to do it, then announce early enough that they are going to retire.
Ron Wyden is 76, when he’s up in 2028 he will be nearly 80. He’s been in Washington since before I was born. Jeff Merkley is 68, which given he’s up in 2026 he’ll only (only!?!) be 70. My congresswoman is 75. They’ve all done good work, but it’s time to hang it up. Advancing age means diminishing returns.
I didn’t want Biden in ‘20, but Oregon votes so late in the primary calendar that I didn’t have a choice. The horse race was already called. Last year I would have voted for Dean Phillips just because he was the only person brave enough to step up and say hey, this thing we’re doing is gonna fail.
My vote doesn’t count when it comes to who the Dem Presidential candidate is, but my hope is if I call enough maybe my boomer representation will hear me.
We did what he wanted and we lost. So we should no longer listen to the person who has already proven to not get it right. Also I don't care about what Obama did almost a decade ago. I care about now and being where we are at now. Which is a direct result of a guy who doesn't know when to step aside even now.
Don't get me wrong he was a good president. However he was Terrible at commuicating so I'd rather him keep that going and not commuicate now. It's not helpful.
It is not just a Biden problem, nor a Democratic problem (see McConnell, Kay Granger), but Biden broke his word and he and his advisors and family hid his decline. Disgraceful decision and harmful that he won’t stay out of public view.
If one is worse at something now than in the past, regardless of the cause, it's a decline. It might not be dementia or Alzheimers, but Biden had clearly lost a step.
I’m not sure about this. There has been a trickle of accounts by people outside his close circle that say they were alarmed at his decreased ability to hold focus.
I didn't bring up the word 'decline' originally. The following was my first comment on the subject in which I define what 'decline' means to me: "If one is worse at something now than in the past, regardless of the cause, it's a decline. It might not be dementia or Alzheimers, but Biden had clearly lost a step."
As I said, it's a boomer politician problem. Older generations can exert political influence as long as they're alive. But as politicians, someone in their 80s or 90s probably shouldn't be in office.
The reality is that he, like many others, cannot bring himself to step away and accept that his time has passed.
There is something to be said for the wisdom of age, however, I think we need to have age limits on all of the elected officials and SC.
I get it, I still feel like I'm in my 30s as I'm in my late 40s. I imagine it will be the same when I'm 60, not recognizing everywhere that I'm not as fast as I was. Father time is undefeated, however. At some point we all lose our fastball and we need to be humble enough to see it.
And I feel like 75 is a reasonable age limit, if for no other reason than to prevent one generation from dominating the country and biasing all economic and social policy to their own peers and themselves.
No one is able to serve as an elected official or on the SC after age 75. No one is allowed to serve more than 2 terms as President, 3 terms as a senator, or 5 terms in the House in their lifetime.
If they want to serve after that, they can help advise the next group. This shouldn't be their entire professional career.
Well, it's a bigger issue now, because people live longer now. In say, 1970, the life expectancy on average was 10 years less than it is today. But because we have better medicine, we can survive things that killed earlier generation. As a result, people don't leave positions as early.
This is not an American only thing. This is a global issue, where many leaders have gotten older as time has gone by.
Our country is pretty unique among OECD nations though in how many geriatric national pols we have. Some of these countries have prime ministers in their 30s and 40s and their parties aren't led by 80 year olds.
I feel like talking about Biden makes it seem like it's a uniquely Biden problem. It really isn't. It's something his entire generation has utterly refused to do, which is accept their mortality and step aside.
RBG died in office despite everyone knowing that she should have stepped down long before. Pelosi and Schumer have held their gavels so long that an entire political generation went into the private sector during the Obama years. But the most obvious to me was the Dianne Feinstein stuff.
For those unaware, she was basically brain dead for a long time, unable to do her job, unable to vote or get around on her own, and instead of stepping down and having a replacement put in place, questions about her age and health were treated as scandalous. All the while, she was moved around like it was weekend at bernies.
It was really gross! But it's also par for the course for the boomer generation of politicians. They utterly refuse to accept their age and mortality, and their handlers keep them around far too long.
But Biden trying to go out 'one more time' and 'set the record straight' is the same thing that Trump does, and it's like a punch drunk boxer who thinks he still has it and going out there and losing over and over.
It's sad. it's pathetic. Politics aside, his time is over, and he refuses to let anyone else have the last word, even though other people will always have the last word after he dies. Someone else always gets the last word.
Maybe it wouldn't have mattered, maybe that's true. But it's also irrelevant. The contest is over. He has no business in politics, and we shouldn't act like his words have any relevance. I felt the same about Hillary Clinton after she lost in 2016. Whatever the merits, it's over. Move on. We never need to hear from you again, because you are no longer relevant to the conversation moving forward.
And of all the things that the boomer generation of politicians hates to accept, it's that they are no longer relevant culturally or politically. Voters might hold sway, yes. But the politicians need to accept that they're in the twilight of their lives, and government is not a jobs program for old people.
see also (for olds refusing to leave): Scalia, Grassley
The boomer generation is defined as those born between 1945 and 1965. Biden was born in 1942, Polosi in 1940, RBG in 1933. Someone born in 1959 would be a boomer and in their 60’s. Gov Pritzker was born in 1965 on the cusp of boomer and GenX. I agree with some of your concerns, but would also like to see a bit more precision in your use of generational terminology. Your central examples are not boomers. That said, the Clintons fall squarely in the boomer generation. I myself am on the cusp of boomer and the silent generation.
Well said!
I believe former presidents are uniquely qualified to raise their voices and warn the American people if the country is taking a dangerous turn. Hopefully Democrats will remain the "Big Tent" party and there will always be a place at the table for all of us.
Yep. I actually find W's silence to be a dereliction of duty.
I don't really disagree with your sentiment, but there is also something to be said for the elder statesmen in either party stepping up and saying "hey, this isn't right" when we go off the rails.
I think Biden needs to go away, but where' Bush defending his PEPFAR program, or Obama helping to rally the next generation? I would think their legacies should matter to them.
If you're past the age of 70, it's ok to take your hands off the reins and coach up the next generation or work as an advisor. When the decline comes, it's usually pretty fast. I also think taking yourself to the talk show circuit in some Don Quixote attempt to set the record straight is a waste of everyone's time.
This boomer agrees with one caveat: Joe is not a Boomer
Dianne Feinstein wasn’t a boomer (born 1933). Even Biden isn’t a boomer (they are from 1946-64).
It’s more a “politician” thing, I’d say.
I agree with a lot of what you have said, but it’s not a problem particular to Boomers (full disclosure, I am one). I grew up in SC with Strom Thurmond as my Senator for as long as I could remember. NC had Jesse Helms. Not Boomers at all. But aside from blaming one generation in particular, I agree that it’s not helpful for Biden or HRC to say a word.
Agree 100%. The pols he mentions aren’t boomers anyway (Diane Feinstein was born in 1933, for example.
As a boomer myself, I agree. I voted for Biden in 2020 of course, but I really wanted a younger president. Actually Kamala Harris was my pick back then and naturally I voted for her in 2024. We need new, younger blood.
I genuinely like my Senators, I think they do good work MOST of the time. Once a month I call their offices and ask that they find people to mentor that could run to replace them. And if they can’t bring themselves to do it, then announce early enough that they are going to retire.
Ron Wyden is 76, when he’s up in 2028 he will be nearly 80. He’s been in Washington since before I was born. Jeff Merkley is 68, which given he’s up in 2026 he’ll only (only!?!) be 70. My congresswoman is 75. They’ve all done good work, but it’s time to hang it up. Advancing age means diminishing returns.
I didn’t want Biden in ‘20, but Oregon votes so late in the primary calendar that I didn’t have a choice. The horse race was already called. Last year I would have voted for Dean Phillips just because he was the only person brave enough to step up and say hey, this thing we’re doing is gonna fail.
My vote doesn’t count when it comes to who the Dem Presidential candidate is, but my hope is if I call enough maybe my boomer representation will hear me.
Because they lost their opinions don't matter?
Obama didn't gain seats in House or Senate; he had zero coattails for any other candidate. Obama left the Dem Party in a lot worse shape than Biden.
I mean kinda.
We did what he wanted and we lost. So we should no longer listen to the person who has already proven to not get it right. Also I don't care about what Obama did almost a decade ago. I care about now and being where we are at now. Which is a direct result of a guy who doesn't know when to step aside even now.
Don't get me wrong he was a good president. However he was Terrible at commuicating so I'd rather him keep that going and not commuicate now. It's not helpful.
Bernie being an absolute exception which proves that age is not the issue
And if you take an example in business, Warren Buffett successfully ran Berkshire until he was 94(!)
It's not impossible for someone to outlast their peers, especially if they have a good support infrastructure, it's just unlikely.
If Bernie was, today, trying to run for president again, I would 100% apply this to him.
He knows that and he isn’t running. I guess my point is he’s completely competent mentally.
For the moment. Things can turn quickly as you get older. That's the problem. You don't recover like you did when you were younger.
It is not just a Biden problem, nor a Democratic problem (see McConnell, Kay Granger), but Biden broke his word and he and his advisors and family hid his decline. Disgraceful decision and harmful that he won’t stay out of public view.
He didn't break his word
And there is no 'decline'.
Biden allowed the country to believe he would only serve for one term.
And I don’t know how anyone could argue he hadn’t declined. It was difficult to watch.
No, he did not.
He was old. That is not "decline"
If one is worse at something now than in the past, regardless of the cause, it's a decline. It might not be dementia or Alzheimers, but Biden had clearly lost a step.
Most 80+ people do lose a step.
Which is very different than the effort to state he "declined".
I’m not sure about this. There has been a trickle of accounts by people outside his close circle that say they were alarmed at his decreased ability to hold focus.
"hold focus" - you keep trying to use different words
none of which means "decline" by the way you originally intended
I didn't bring up the word 'decline' originally. The following was my first comment on the subject in which I define what 'decline' means to me: "If one is worse at something now than in the past, regardless of the cause, it's a decline. It might not be dementia or Alzheimers, but Biden had clearly lost a step."
Actually it's not.
LOL.
There is nothing you wrote that is the truth.
As I said, it's a boomer politician problem. Older generations can exert political influence as long as they're alive. But as politicians, someone in their 80s or 90s probably shouldn't be in office.
The reality is that he, like many others, cannot bring himself to step away and accept that his time has passed.
Makes me happy that my IL reps, Durbin and Schakowsky announced their retirements early so we can have full active primaries.
Used to be that IL representatives would announce after the primary so they could control who followed them.
It is a hard lesson to learn.
You see it in generations before you.
And then when it is your turn. [Who? Me? I'm only 74, and you don't understand...these times are different... et cetera...]
There is something to be said for the wisdom of age, however, I think we need to have age limits on all of the elected officials and SC.
I get it, I still feel like I'm in my 30s as I'm in my late 40s. I imagine it will be the same when I'm 60, not recognizing everywhere that I'm not as fast as I was. Father time is undefeated, however. At some point we all lose our fastball and we need to be humble enough to see it.
And I feel like 75 is a reasonable age limit, if for no other reason than to prevent one generation from dominating the country and biasing all economic and social policy to their own peers and themselves.
I totally agree with this. Age and term limits.
No one is able to serve as an elected official or on the SC after age 75. No one is allowed to serve more than 2 terms as President, 3 terms as a senator, or 5 terms in the House in their lifetime.
If they want to serve after that, they can help advise the next group. This shouldn't be their entire professional career.
Well, it's a bigger issue now, because people live longer now. In say, 1970, the life expectancy on average was 10 years less than it is today. But because we have better medicine, we can survive things that killed earlier generation. As a result, people don't leave positions as early.
This is not an American only thing. This is a global issue, where many leaders have gotten older as time has gone by.
Our country is pretty unique among OECD nations though in how many geriatric national pols we have. Some of these countries have prime ministers in their 30s and 40s and their parties aren't led by 80 year olds.
Sergio Matterella will be 84 this summer. He's been in office since 2015.