Obama: "At some point, you age out. You're not connected directly to the immediate struggles that folks are going..."

[demmiblue]

Obama: "At some point, you age out. You're not connected directly to the immediate struggles that folks are going through. I'm not making a hard and fast rule here, but I think Democrats do well when we have candidates who are plugged into the moment. To the zeitgeist. To the times."

Obama: "At some point, you age out. You're not connected directly to the immediate struggles that folks are going through. I'm not making a hard and fast rule here, but I think Democrats do well when we have candidates who are plugged into the moment. To the zeitgeist. To the times."

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-02-16T20:57:12.519Z

[legallyblondeNYC]

1. Sen. Schumer - I think he means you....

After all, you're not a wartime consigliari.

[newdeal2]

6. But on the flip side, Pelosi was perhaps the most effective person we had in Congress

I think most Republicans would even agree.

And she was both old and pretty rich at the time so not that connected with the average person Obama is talking about.

But she wasn’t the figurehead of the party. That is what we are currently lacking to take on Trump.

[3Hotdogs]

9. And Bernie is still agin' but not out.

[flashman13]

12. This has nothing to do with chronological age. We are talking about replacing people that still carry the ideas of 20th

century politics. The old ways of thinking and politics do not meet the demands of the moment.

We need leaders that are willing to fight Trump, hammer and tongs at every turn, to drive him and his MAGAt mob out of power and restore democracy and the rule of law.

We also need leaders willing to put the oligarchs and corporations in their place so that we provide for the needs of the many, not the wants and comfort of the few. That means driving money out of politics and breaking up the monopolistic power big business.

Schumer and Jeffries, et al, are not up to the task. They are both too beholding to old ideas and the donor class.

[hamsterjill]

2. This old lady wholeheartedly agrees.

Obama “gets” it and I am SO glad to see him more often in public settings the past couple of weeks.

[msongs]

4. here in hawaii my situation is stable. I know there are many people around me who are stressing

I live on a budget and so long as my health is ok Im getting along fine. I donate to several local charities who are more capable of reaching those in need than any random donations.

[CBHagman]

5. I need to hear more of the conversation, but want to mention something here...

...and what I'd mention is that people of all ages play key roles in society generally and in politics specifically. Yes, I know people are going to cite specific examples of politicians they believe should have retired years ago, but ageism is one of the acceptable bigotries in the United States, and "acceptable" does not mean "defensible."

And as a voting bloc, older adults have been more likely to participate in the political process than younger adults have been. I have not studied the reasons behind that, but beware of anything that dehumanizes older adults. That is not what the former president is doing, but other people do in fact dehumanize older adults.

[surfered]

7. 60s civil rights and Vietnam War. 2001, Iraq War. 2016-now, Republicanism crazy and Trump.

I should be “aged out,” but I’m not, dammit! The fight goes on!

[Prairie Gates]

8. There was a great editorial in the NY Times today trying to bring some common sense to

body positivity. The claim, anyway, is that the body positivity movement became so radical in its claims that it denied even basic health considerations. There were activists saying "the word health is fatphobic," and "obese is a slur," and other pretty out there claims.

I think a parallel shift needs to happen with more radical claims about agism. Certainly, there is agism, and it must be combatted. But people should also retire. It's bonkers to have 80 year olds as the leaders of our political parties. Seriously, just retire.

[3Hotdogs]

10. Bernie should hang it up?

[jfz9580m]

11. We seem to have a real problem as a species

With moderation.

Because society is pretty right-shifted, I am apparently “radical left”. But I totally agree with you.

Our shitty media and a lot of the more grating activists have made it hard for people to comprehend something that humans had a more intuitive and instinctive understanding of.

Which is that when irl you assess people, you wouldn’t typically primarily assess them as Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, Black, White, immigrant or even male or female…the years have made me a little wary of the male sex..which is unfortunate because some 15 years ago, I had lead a sheltered enough life in different clean NIH labs and before that in school in India, where I rarely ran into creepy men so much as ordinary dull people going about their lives.

That programming is still so strong in me that with some breathing room, I revert to that retaining only enough info this time around to clampdown with any of this other type I only came across under more artificial circumstances and with plenty of kayfabe and bullshit.

Anyway, usually you assess people more, or I do anyway and that has to be a lot of people who aren’t actively programmed with prejudices, as: kinda sleazy, charlatan, insincere, kinda daft, disingenuous, no self awareness, a bore, talks too much (my group by now! i had to endure way too much daft shit), solipsistic or the kind of person you think one can work with without it being a huge strain.

And your point is spot on. This all or nothing view is counterintuitive. Otoh there is so much deregulation, cruelty and overreach in society, it is not possible to be insipid about it.

So finding that fine line in this accelerating stupidity is the thing.

My own lens on the world is that stupidity more than malice is often the issue. A lot of malicious people, especially our billionaires and many leaders, do come off as really stupid people. Like a bunker and buying islands etc is not elite, it is stupid.

Endlessly breaking society and trying to pull off daft Machiavellian gambits, flooding the zone etc is stupid. And by the same token, preaching and purporting to care for people while solipsistically pissing people off is stupid.

When dealing with manipulation (in daft ways sure, but it works in this crowded and chaotic hellscape) at scale, finding ways to handle situations (where tempers and patience are frayed all around to begin with), it is essential to handle it with some finesse over that woman Beverly D’Angelo’s style..

I reason with my dad somewhat carefully and respectfully all the time..I used to spar with him, but as I have grown older I have found he is not unreasonable absent heavy-handed or quarrelsome ways. Humans are confusing and surprising. He is kinda conservative, but he can turn around and be genuinely very progressive (pro trans rights, feminist etc). He is definitely foul mouthed though..he says he is a sailor and that is a feature not a bug ;-/…

This stale surprise minimization forced by our sleazy pseudo elites insistant on retaining their death grip over all resources is breaking everything.

They have made this environment of perpetual and totally disingenuous offense-taking over trivialities the norm and it is so solipsistic to fail to see by now that hectoring people isn’t changing things and it is possible without in any real way diluting standards at all to, let it go with the type of message control that is not even accurate that you mention.

It is so bogus. After all if people are in a perpetual snit about something trivial, much easier for our bogus robber baron elite to rob us blind and strip mine the planet.

I have seen those groups you talk about..and then they turn around and shill Dove or some such corporate giant.
By the same token, it is not like I don’t use products from those giants and build my own computer from scratch, which would be impractical, zombie like in a person like me with minimal interest in computers. I just do it ungraciously as a compromise ;-/.