A handful of GOP senators is weighing whether to force a fraught internal debate about their leadership’s future after Mitch McConnell’s second public freeze-up in a month.

Some rank-and-file Republicans have discussed the possibility of a broader conversation once senators return to Washington next week, according to a person directly involved in the conversations who confirmed them on condition of anonymity. Party leadership is not currently involved in those discussions, and nothing has been decided yet, this person added.

It takes just five Republican senators to force a special conference meeting, which is the most direct way to have a specific discussion about the minority leader after his public pause on Wednesday revived questions about his condition. But the Senate GOP also holds private lunches two or three times a week, giving members another forum for hashing out the direction of the party’s leadership — one that could forestall the need for a special confab.

  • ohlaph@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    There should be both term limits and age restrictions sumilar to air traffic controllers.

    No reason someone over 65 should be deciding the future of our country.

    • LordOfTheChia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      At the very minimum, there should be cognitive tests to ensure they have their mental faculties and agency.

      There’s some folks who are still sharp well into their 80s.

      Others can suffer dementia and other severe cognitive issues in their 30s and 40s.

      Putting an arbitrary age limit (like say 65) would also keep out any folks who want to run after they retire (and who can’t afford to run for office before then).

      • Bobert@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Putting an arbitrary age limit (like say 65) would also keep out any folks who want to run after they retire (and who can’t afford to run for office before then).

        That sounds like a separate problem that shouldn’t be used to argue against mandatory retirements for the absolute highest political positions.

    • thessnake03@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      I unironically heard a Republican coworker say there needs to be an age limit, specifically referring to Biden. I wanted to logic them out further for the rest, but didn’t have it in me. I try to talk politics as little as possible in the office.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are plenty of ways to serve that don’t involve directly holding power. They could, for example, become advisors for new legislators.