One of the ways gerontocracy gets entrenched is that it becomes impossible to criticize longtime leaders, who are afforded great respect simply because they've been important for so long.
When's the last time you read a mainstream piece questioning the competence of Dem elders?
When's the last time you read a mainstream piece questioning the competence of Dem elders?
It's particularly frustrating because there has been lots of mainstream commentary about the importance of Trump accountability, bold reform legislation, and so forth.
But no one will complete the loop and wonder if the group failing to do this is perhaps not up to the task.
But no one will complete the loop and wonder if the group failing to do this is perhaps not up to the task.
You'll get fancy NYT columnists who will write over and over about how we must hold Trump to account for his abuses. Then, Nancy Pelosi simply refuses to take basic steps towards that end.
And those same writers suddenly go radio silent.
And those same writers suddenly go radio silent.
But how is anything supposed to ever get better if our leaders can fail again, and again, and again, and those failures are always excused and no one ever considers whether a different set of people should be in charge?
Instead of saying "Maybe we should have leaders willing and able to do what needs to be done," the idea that Pelosi/Schumer should stay in charge is taken as a given.
Instead, the reaction is always "I'm sure no one else could have done better," or "What they did makes sense"
Instead, the reaction is always "I'm sure no one else could have done better," or "What they did makes sense"
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
