cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/45996578
Democratic members of Congress know they have an age problem—and it’s hurting them.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/45996578
Democratic members of Congress know they have an age problem—and it’s hurting them.
The real issue with these candidates is: we’re not electing the person, we’re electing the team they putatively command, the network you refer to - all the people they work with and trust and will continue to use into the future if re-elected. And that’s the twist, the candidate can be a total figurehead, a loose cannon moron even, but who’s behind them is what’s really important.
Reagan demonstrated this in spades: the lead actor of Bedtime for Bonzo? Really? We finally topped that absurdity with 45, but it was still an unprecedented doozie - his job was to read the script (teleprompter) deliver the lines, end of story - the machine behind him was what put “his” policies into motion.
I specifically wasn’t talking about a position that has an 8 year lifespan. This was a discussion about positions that have no limits and the system that rewards seniority over capability.
And yes you are absolutely correct the machine can and does be made to work for the next person who slips into that position. However that event is significantly less useful to new faces than it is to established politicians who are also known quantities that are most likely using those networks as well.
It does matter who the figurehead is, in spite of the popular belief that the individual doesn’t matter. It absolutely matters and that’s kind of what we are taking about. Isn’t it? Someone who is already in the game is going to use those system much better… And when we don’t use them we have instability and incompetence which causes instability and damages things for long periods if not I definately.
Your own example of Reagan and Trump prove my point. It’s not just age that’s the most important factor. It’s competence. Cognition is a big part of competence