Senator John Kennedy froze and then properly zoned out—forcing Fox to cut the interview short.

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    But half of their experience does, and the other half does give them context. (I would personally like it if more people in office today could remember what it was like to have fo fight in a war against fascists.) If they can offer a better vision than other candidates, and their voters are fully informed about their choices, I have no problem if voters send them back.

    The problem comes when districts are manipulated to the point where the general election isn’t competitive, and primaries against incumbents are also discouraged. That guarantees that if someone wins an election once, they can hold on to the seat as long as they want to, well past the point where they are relevant, because they will never have to face a contested election again. That’s the real problem.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      The context the irrelevant stuff offers…

      …Does it tell them millennials are lazy because they can’t afford to have a family and own a house on a single income?

      (Yes it does.)

      …Does it tell them that being LGBTQ+ is wrong, immoral, and they should not have equal rights?

      (Yes. It does)

      …Has the experience of fighting fascists in a war stopped them from being fascist, or from supporting genocide?

      (No. It does not.)

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Now who’s stereotyping based on age?

        You can’t assume that everyone who is 80+ holds these views, but if that person wants to run for office and represent you, then you absolutely have the right to ask them, and withhold your vote if they don’t answer to your liking.

        The problem is that there are no alternatives. That person can be blatant in their suckitude, and you have no other option, within the party or outside of it. People like this keep getting elected because the system is stacked towards incumbency. Once you get the gig in a safe district, it is basically a life appointment. It was never meant to be that way.

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          You can’t assume that everyone who is 80+ holds these views, but if that person wants to run for office and represent you, then you absolutely have the right to ask them, and withhold your vote if they don’t answer to your liking.

          Did I say that? You are putting words into my mouth.

          They are, however common views, and serve as an excellent example of how that “context” isn’t always a good thing.

          If you’re gonna sit there and say anyone under x age is immature - and that’s exactly what you’re saying- then I get to say anyone over y age is decrepit.

          And i think you understand that point. It doesn’t matter if it’s universally true- it’s true enough, on both sides the issue.