Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:No need, like Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters she will be in office forever.
Misogyny much. How about Grassley, Risch, McConnell, Sanders, John Carter, Clyburn, and Hoyer.
Anonymous wrote:No need, like Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters she will be in office forever.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This thread stinks of ageism.
No, it doesn’t. It stinks of hoarding power. No one thinks that somebody 87 years old should still be in Congress. No one with a cancer diagnosis and who is over 70 should run for reelection when we have a fascist in the White House. Congress is a physical & emotional demanding job. No one is entitled to power.
These people employ a staff that are basically unemployable anywhere else. Can you please think of others before you think of yourself.
Is this a plea for sympathy or are you pointing out how ineffective she and her selected staff are?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This thread stinks of ageism.
No, it doesn’t. It stinks of hoarding power. No one thinks that somebody 87 years old should still be in Congress. No one with a cancer diagnosis and who is over 70 should run for reelection when we have a fascist in the White House. Congress is a physical & emotional demanding job. No one is entitled to power.
These people employ a staff that are basically unemployable anywhere else. Can you please think of others before you think of yourself.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There are people who would like to run, but won’t dare cross the DC Dem machine. She should step down, but like the 15 other geriatrics is continuing to run. A mixture of hubris and her staff wanting to keep their jobs.
And no, she’s not mentoring anyone. these people think they’ll live forever.
People have tried to run against her before and lost.
Anonymous wrote:I'm going ot admit to being wholly self interested right now - with college age kids going to state school.
I used to think she was - as others have said on this thread - terrible and only performative for statehood and not in touch.
BUT. She is the sole reason DC Tag continues to exist. 10K a year does not cover the difference between in state and out of state tuition, but it sure helps a whole heck of a lot and would be a real loss. I have to believe it's on the chopping block right now and if there is one thing Norton has shown herself ot be good at, it's preserving that 10K.
I hope we have someone good who succeeds her and someone that can pull the strongs and make the connections she has. I really hope she has been grooming someone. Or that whomever takes her spot keeps the staff that have those relationships that can get this done.
She's not proven to be able to solve the stupid budget problem the House is refusing to fix. So maybe her mojo is waning.
Anonymous wrote:There are people who would like to run, but won’t dare cross the DC Dem machine. She should step down, but like the 15 other geriatrics is continuing to run. A mixture of hubris and her staff wanting to keep their jobs.
And no, she’s not mentoring anyone. these people think they’ll live forever.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This thread stinks of ageism.
No, it doesn’t. It stinks of hoarding power. No one thinks that somebody 87 years old should still be in Congress. No one with a cancer diagnosis and who is over 70 should run for reelection when we have a fascist in the White House. Congress is a physical & emotional demanding job. No one is entitled to power.
These people employ a staff that are basically unemployable anywhere else. Can you please think of others before you think of yourself.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This thread stinks of ageism.
No, it doesn’t. It stinks of hoarding power. No one thinks that somebody 87 years old should still be in Congress. No one with a cancer diagnosis and who is over 70 should run for reelection when we have a fascist in the White House. Congress is a physical & emotional demanding job. No one is entitled to power.
Anonymous wrote:This thread stinks of ageism.