• ceenote@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      180
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I was gonna say she’s too young, but apparently she’d turn 35 about a month before the election. A president who’s barely old enough… What a nice change of pace that would be.

      • Beaver@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        2 months ago

        That requirement is so ageist as the brain is fully developed at age 26

        • 4am@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          32
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          The idea is to have some experience in politics in lower positions before taking on the hot seat.

          • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’m just upset that there’s no maximum age limit. If they are fine with a minimum why isn’t there a maximum?

          • emax_gomax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            I feel like mandating a certain number of years in some managerial governmental position would be more effective. Trump is basically a living example of how to get around that. Honestly a lot of democracy kinda assumes people elect competent and honest leaders and a lot of humanity are just brainwashed morons so we’re stuck with what we got :/.

          • AeroLemming@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            So it’s okay to have a constitutionally-mandated age requirement, but not a no-treason requirement?

          • stoly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            You were an experienced master or your craft at the age of 35 all the way 250 years ago. People made it to their 80s but your life expectancy was much lower. Basically 35 was the perfect age.

            What we need is an amendment to make this reflect modern life.

          • Freefall@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’d support (median life expectancy ±15 years determine at the start of the election year). Gives you a middleing generation so the extremes are not super underrepresented and it makes sure they have some life under their belt.

        • drcobaltjedi@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          What? Are you saying a bunch of racist slave holders might have also been ageist? Complaing about “kids these days”?

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          True. There’s this fun quirk of US law, though, that makes ageism against young people completely fine and dandy!

          You can discriminate against people for being young all you want. That’s the Gerontocracy in action…

          • Beaver@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            And some old people lash out at me for stating the system is unfair. They need to learn to pass the torch.

          • Furbag@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 months ago

            Absolutely. Housing crisis in full swing here and yet 55+ communities are somehow still legal. Infuriating that it works to the benefit of the old fucks by earmarking plenty of available units for only them, but when the young people want to get rid of it so they can have a shot at property ownership too, suddenly you’re an ageist.

      • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        32
        ·
        2 months ago

        WOW, that would skip an entire generation from presidential representation. I’m sick of voting for geriatrics but to jump straight to someone younger … I still would but ouch.

        The march of time is steady towards the sounds of that waterfall. We’re fucked.

          • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yes. But generations has different views and priorities from one to the other. For example boomers see the world as they remember and hang on to what they know, but that policy isn’t working anymore.

            I, for one, am concerned retirement won’t exist by the time I get too old to work. Our current candidates don’t need to give a crap about that. They’ll die before that becomes an issue.

            Boomers had a good run, and did a lot of damage. Younger generations are doing a lot of fix-its; that’s commendable. Mine was called lazy, ignored, and I would really like for it to not be passed over. I don’t have a lot of time left to hope things start getting better from a generation that seems to do rash, illogical things to justify logical conclusions.

            I just want us to have a chance to shine in the sun.

            • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              2 months ago

              generations has different views and priorities from one to the other.

              Yes, but Gen X and millennials also have a shitload of views and priorities IN COMMON.

              As far as I can tell, there’s a much smaller political difference between 35 and 55 than 55 at 75.

              That might not always been the case, but since boomers and that sneaky “silent generation” (Biden, Trump, Pelosi, McConnell, Feinstein. Schumer is just barely too young to qualify) have been fucking over ALL subsequent generations for decades, we’re pretty much in the same leaky boat now.

        • ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          38
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Old people just finished destroying the environment and AOC just filed articles of impeachment against sitting SCOTUS justices. She is rising to the occasion and deserves your support.

          • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            2 months ago

            She is rising to the occasion and deserves your support.

            And she does, like I already said above.

        • MsPenguinette@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          38
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          At this point, I think us millenials as an entire generation should agree to just hand the keys directly over to Gen Z. I think it’s probably good policy to do the exact opposite of whatever the boomers have done.

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            Nah, don’t punish AOC and other brilliant millennials for what the boomers did.

            Also, let Gen Z live a little before you give them a gilded cage in Washington.

            They’re already kicking more ass protesting and otherwise organizing for justice to bypass Washington better than most of us ever did.

          • stoly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’m 48 but mentor university students by the dozen. Even Millennials are dinosaurs compared to Gen Z. Everyone older needs to STFU and GTFO.

          • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yeah I get it. And it may go that way.

            I just don’t want to get sick, lose my retirement savings to medical debt, have social security run out, and wind up homeless like things seem to be headed.

            • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              All of those things are things millennials worry about too. Except most of us don’t have any savings to lose even though a lot of us are in our 40s now.

            • 4am@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              2 months ago

              Honestly we’ve all being doing vibes-based voting anyway, being on some ranked-choice rizz and see who drips to the top

              (That being said I’m all for Gen Z to just come in and clean up)

          • makyo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Hey you can’t stay the least worst generation if everyone is thinking about you all the time

          • Soup@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            Well they did kinda just allow all the boomer shit to keep going. They allowed themselves to be forgotten by sucking up to the generation before.

            My dad’s like that, if we’re acting like single family members are important. He still falls for the same old bullshit and despite being a software engineer he has that same old pre-internet attitude. He had enough success in his life that he could insulate himself from having to acknowledge just how bad things are today.

            Gen X obviously had some good in there just like the boomers did but they just haven’t proven themselves to be up with the times enough to be effective in the modern world that came basically out of nowhere, faster than the change in generations could follow. As a generation they just don’t have the skills or experience to act like they’re owed a turn. Anyone who thinks they’re entitled to run a fucking country just because it’s their “turn” doesn’t deserve to be anywhere near that kind of power.

            • ronalicious@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              2 months ago

              there was never enough of genX to get anything done, and there likely won’t be. boomers are still holding on to positions of power (eg Biden), and the millennial gen is bigger than genX as well.

            • Stovetop@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              2 months ago

              I feel like this describes the “upper 50%” of any generation, though.

              I’m a millennial, and myself and plenty other millennials I know are still riding the struggle bus. But it’s easy to pop on social media and see people you went to school with in photos with their happy families and big houses and nice cars that they earned from their successful corporate jobs, because those jobs still exist for anyone who has connections.

              And it is millennials by-and-large who are responsible for the neocon movement that helped put Trump in power, fashy groups like the Proud Boys or Oath Keepers or whatever other flavor of the month domestic terrorism group, all of the “free speech absolutists” you see on Twitter and Reddit, and Silicon Valley techbros who pretend to be progressive in service to the almighty dollar.

              No generation is free from bad eggs, because eventually enough people kowtow to the ideological apparati of the ruling class and perpetuate the endless cycle of “haves” vs “have nots”.

            • stoly@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Allow? Did you notice that most boomers still haven’t retired? Gen X and Millennials were never allowed space to exist, it’s been nonstop boomers since the late 1940s.

        • FrostyTheDoo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          The generation in between is the one that keeps electing geriatrics. They either didn’t want the job or they weren’t bold enough to kick their parents into the passenger seat. I say we skip them.

        • takeda@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Obama a bit disrupted the process of getting young blood in DNC, while trump did the same thing in GOP.

    • qooqie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      Only issue is she’s a divisive figure so center shitters might be driven to vote for trump. I think she’s awesome and would love if she was the first woman pres

      • Burstar@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        45
        ·
        2 months ago

        A huge part of the poor youth vote attendance is due to them not feeling represented by geriatric nominees. If she were to run she would get very strong youth and minority support in addition to all the left voters.

        TBH it would be a dream come true for her to run and win this year and I’m not even American.

        • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’m Canadian and agree with you.

          Just imagine a ticket with AOC and Bernie Sanders! Now that would so something to see!

          • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Bernie winning Dem primaries was the last time we saw the DNC put its heels in the sand. I don’t think anyone should be surprised that a huge portion of the Dem voter base now feels consistently disenfranchised, especially the younger side. And the current issue with Biden doesn’t improve it.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Trump and Biden are also divisive figures which is why this is even a discussion to begin with. We need to end the status quo immediately.

  • Neato@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    99
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Fuck yeah. Probably won’t go anywhere with a traitorous house majority but it’s worth it to try and get them on the record.

  • Asherah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m voting for Biden. Not happily, not even simply neutral on the matter. I hate that I have to vote for Biden.

    If AOC ran, I would not be even a little reluctant to vote for her. She reminds me of Bernie.

    • Zerlyna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m voting for the Biden administration. It’s more than just him. We need them all.

      • cmbabul@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m voting the same way but more because we need to not have the other administration, we need much more that the current admin but we also do not have the luxury of being picky

      • noevidenz@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        AOC is currently 34 and her birthday is in October, so she will actually be old enough to be president by the time of the election.

    • lone_faerie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s giving Bojack Horseman.

      Our main story: ominous and anomalous accusations against Hank Hippopopalous. Who is this anonymous “Diane Nguyen” and what does she have against our beloved Hippopotamus? Joining me now is Hippopapalous apologist, and armchair sociologist, Cardigan Burke.

  • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    If you’re going to do the thing with replacing Biden as the candidate, you couldn’t get better than AOC, who will be 35 before November.

    I personally think replacing Biden this late is a bad move even though I already think Biden sucks. But I grit my teeth and voted for the fucker just like I did with Clinton, because the alternative is literally insanity and fascism. I just don’t realsitically seeing the party coalesce around anyone new at the last minute. Organizing Democrats is like herding cats, being a big tent party sucks noodles.

    • Ghostface@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      2 months ago

      Just keep repeating, Biden may not be the best, but his administration has been fantastic!

      In comparison to the other party… Not just Biden you are voting for the administration. Supreme court justices Which affect everyday life!

      • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Exactly this. So the party doesn’t do what I would personally prefer. I still prefer whatever the fuck they’re doing over outright fascism.

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          This is when “meets expectations” looks great after so much bad behavior. It’s ok to appreciate something good.

      • MeekerThanBeaker@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        She’s more ready than Trump is who was already “president.”

        That said, I would rather her be in Congress longer because she can be a voice longer. After 8 years of being president if elected, she wouldn’t then want to become a senator or whatever. That would pretty much be it for her in politics outside of ex-president things… and she’d only be 43.

        I’m also sure Kamala would be pissed if AOC were to get the nom instead of her. Not that that matters.

  • tisktisk@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Wasn’t trump impeached twice? What does this even mean concretely?
    Not knocking the sentiment, just questioning the practicality

    • finley@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Put simply, an impeachment happens in the House of Representatives and is akin to an indictment by Grand Jury. If successful, the proceeding then moves to the Senate for trial, where the party is either convicted or acquitted. A conviction would mean removal from office and the possibility of facing criminal charges.

      Trump was impeached twice, but he was not convicted either time.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Gives Dem voters something to rally around in the lead up to the election…

      Like. This is literally the time and place for performative actions, but I swear it’s like everyone’s forgot what the word “campaign” means.

    • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Without getting too technical, and someone please correct anything that may be represented incorrectly: It’s basically like a trial. The House is the prosecutor, and jury and the Senate is the judge. The plaintiff is the United States itself, and the defendant is the political figure (president, SC justice, etc)

      The House gathers / presents evidence and tries them then renders a verdict (Impeachment)

      The Senate is responsible for sentencing or acquitting. Without a 2/3 majority voting to remove them from office, the impeached is acquitted.

      In both of Trump’s, the House found him guilty of the charges (impeached) but the Republican controlled Senate acquitted him.

      Hard to edit it in on mobile, but see @ricecake@sh.itjust.works 's clarifications below to my analogy.

      • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        Impeachment is the decision to press charges, and the Senate trial is closer to the actual trial.

        “Charged and convicted” -> “impeached and convicted”

        Otherwise a perfectly good analogy. :)

        The distinction only matters for people who bring up due process concerns. The impeachment proceedings aren’t actually a trial, but a decision to have one, as such you aren’t obligated to the same ability to speak in your own defense as you would be at a proper trial. With the Senate trial there’s more expectation of due process because it’s an actual trial.

    • Burstar@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Unfortunately it means as much as it did for the Trump impeachments. There is zero chance any, let alone enough, Republicans would vote to convict these conservative judges regardless of the evidence and validity of the charge(s).

    • S_204@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      It means nothing. It’s political theatre to distract from the party’s current issues.

  • barkingspiders@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Fantastic, I know this probably won’t go anywhere but this is the right thing to do regardless. SCOTUS needs to be held accountable to the American people for their actions. We grant them extraordinary power and that must come with extraordinary accountability. Holding them to a lower standard than any judge in a lesser court is ridiculous. The higher the court, the higher the standards should be.

  • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Lets all hold our breath while we wait for something to actually happen because of this.

  • 🖖USS-Ethernet@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Never going to happen, but good on her for at least trying. I’m not up to speed on Alito, but from what I heard about Thomas, those were most definitely bribes. Idk how anyone could consider it anything else.

    • glimse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Alito is the guy who flew MAGA-adjacent flags at his home and his summer home and blamed both on his wife

  • blazera@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    give me an AOC presidential candidacy and I’ll shut up about green party

    • 2484345508@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m for the top cap, but I do want someone just a bit older on the Supreme Court. 35 is the age for presidency. I’m good with 35-65 with an 8 year maximum term.

      • stoly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        You can definitely remain a successful intellectual later in life. Staying on top of the fast moving stuff is probably harder when you’re older.