before they fired him?

to advocate for primarying Democrats so that he could further enrich himself and his organization.

I don't see where President Obama is doing that.

because we expect it of them.

Where is Obama profiting off primarying incumbent Democrats?

It turns out that the long-standing political truths are still out there on a national level. He should learn those so that he really will know it all.

Very few people willingly cede power.

Very few people willing to step up and do the work. Young people don’t appreciate fund raising and meetings. They aren’t interested in compromise. I will happily step down from my county position

...and as Jonathan Capehart observed the other week, we aren't hearing cries for Bernie Sanders to retire.

Government should be intergenerational. It's key to bring multiple perspectives, and institutional knowledge matters. President Biden was effective in ways some other leaders wouldn't have been able to pull off.

And Democratic leadership is not intergenerational at this stage. It is dominated by septuagenarians.

I agree with Obama. The decision-making, worldview, energy and tone of current Dem leadership is not keeping up with the times. It's time for people 70 and older to retire and pass the mantle to people 20 and 30 years younger who aren't sticks in the mud. And don't take umbrage about my use of "sticks in the mud" until you've watched a 20-minute long Chuck Schumer speech in the senate.

The fact that no one's asking Bernie to retire is not evidence that we're wrong about asking for the old generation to pass the torch. Bernie is an outlier. He's a young whipper-snapper in an old man's body.

Republicans have been "greening" for the last several electoral generations. Their SOCTUS picks have been in their 50's, and even 40's, so they can get 30 years of SCOTUS domination. Same with most of their judicial picks. They're supporting younger people for congress. They've been working on this for decades and are backloading the system with horrifically conservative stooges who have lifetime tenure. By stubbornly clinging to power, boomer Dems are hobbling our ability to compete for power.

Ha, so funny. Haven't heard that term in ages.

He was born in 1941, so he is considered a member of the Silent Generation.

But both are elders. I didn't mean to imply boomer was a catchall term for people over a certain age.

Perspective is great but doesn't mean they need to be in control of those decisions.
I mean we have 80+ year olds. I mean on the Republican side they had the chair of the appropriations committee was out of the public eye for 6 weeks before it became publicly known, by way of a newspaper reporter in her home town, that she had been in a memory care facility and her staff and likely others in Congress, like Johnson, had kept it secret.
Grassley says he plans to run again which would keep him in office past 100.

The point is there has to be a balance. The Democratic Caucus needs to stop giving leadership positions based on the age/seniority of the member and be a little more flexible. Like, fine, if the committee chair is older so be it but their deputy should be a younger person or at least not necessarily the next oldest/person with the next most seniority. Especially so if the younger person is studied on the subjects covered by the committee (like a public health person on a committee about public health)

...and at heart, everything we do as Democrats/progressives is about the next generation (the analogy of planting a tree is useful here, with programs and policies meant to prevent problems and address needs—and be adjusted as leaders see how well they work or don't work).

I'm all for balance, and I would also point to one of Heather Cox Richardson's Politics Chats, in which she addressed the different roles within leadership. Here's the video I'm thinking of, and I recommend paying attention to what she says about 34 minutes in, which covers different skill sets.

or control of the House. That being said, running for reelection at 86 would be crazy. If no one else is calling for it, let me be the first.

Democratic House leadership LONG before 2023 - it's like my generation of Democrats had none of the ambitious/aggressive "Young Man in a Hurry" quality in them. If they wind up getting passed over for millennials, it's their own damn fault.

AND rank choice voting asap please!

There might be some boomers that are ok to stick around but I agree with President Obama that the old timers ( and I’m pretty old, too) need to step aside for the younger folks that are rising. This is more their world and future than it is the older folks. The young’s also understand how to fight the modern battles much better than the olds. Gotta meet fire with fire and the young’s bring the necessary fire. I like the idea of ranked voting, too!

That's true democracy, in my opinion. But when you say "open primaries", even the Dems freak out that our power might be threatened. THAT is what Obama is referring to.

Hasn't he heard he’s to be shunned and cast out?

Can’t have new ideas. Or new proposals

I have been saying this since you were elected. Those 80-90 year old congress critters need to move along. They don't have a clue what the next generation can bring us.

These "For Life" benefits in Congress should entice them to resign but noooooo, they will hang on for dear life until they die. It's disgusting how we let this happen.

Always trust a grassroots organizer (who became President twice) to have the pulse of the people!

and then they look at the current crop running the country, most of whom would not qualify as "old" and realize there's no hope at all.

I do agree on the need for a shift from the comfortable entrenched incumbents to representatives more in tune with current issues and perhaps ideas on how to address them, but it is not a panacea

working campaigns and donating money? Don't we need everyone?

The next generation is bringing old fashioned American values? Would that be Pete Hegseth, born in 1980? Or Kristie Noem, age 54? Stephen Miller, born 1985? Elon Musk, also 54? J D Vance, born 1984? Karoline Leavitt, born 1997? I mean, the worst people out there right now with the exception of Trump and RFK are far younger than these "old people." Frankly, as an "old" person, the younger generation currently at the top of politics is looking pretty scary.

OF JOE BIDEN.

Progressives when he was Obama's chief of staff? Very courteous and willing to listen, right?

He's right about that. Every time a reasonable Democrat tries to find common ground or compromise a little bit in order to actually GET a little bit... we hear a chorus of outrage from folks calling them DINO's and demanding that they be primaried and badgered. This is not an "age thing" it's a matter of unrealistic expectations and demands being made on our elected officials and people not understanding how government works... or blaming the party that's NOT in the majority. We need a smarter electorate... that would be a good start.

When the oldsters started their careers, we didn't have Internet-enabled moron mobs and death threats. We could attract better people, because the job was better.

Now you really have to wonder where these "young genius volunteers" are who want to serve us all so badly. We've let the job become so bad that I'm afraid we're getting more and more into a "beggars can't be choosers" market for any form government leadership.

Remarkably, we still get a lot of folks stepping up to the plate, but how long can that last? We need the people to be better followers, imo.

As much as we hear how much the up-and-comers hate "the establishment", it's clear to me that the most vocal opponents do not have a realistic understanding of how government works. In due time some of these outspoken voices occasionally get elected... and lo-and-behold... when their vim-and-vigor and anger fails to produce results, they too become "establishment" and work within the rules, making deals, sharing power, giving-and-getting, finding common ground... exactly as many of the ones before them did.

Rec