GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley on Thursday called the Senate “the most privileged nursing home in the country.”

In response to a question about Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) apparently freezing up on Wednesday while taking questions in Covington, Ky., Haley said on Fox News that the Kentucky senator has “done some great things, and he deserves credit,” but emphasized that “you have to know when to leave.”

““No one should feel good about seeing that any more than we should feel good about seeing Dianne Feinstein, any more than we should feel good about a lot of what’s happening or seeing Joe Biden’s decline,” Haley said. “What I will say is, right now, the Senate is the most privileged nursing home in the country.”

    • neptune@dmv.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 year ago

      We don’t want a Senate with 60 Ted Cruz’s. I agree with the other guy. Money reform first. Then we can consider age and term limits.

      • hglman
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Abolishing the senate is the right reform for the senate.

        • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is the Way.

          You say that out loud tho and people think you’re Hitler. There is nothing undemocratic about advocating the abolition of an undemocratic institution.

            • hglman
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              If there is the will to abolish the Senate, then there will be a will to change how the House is elected and how many members it has.

                • hglman
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Clearly would remove districts from the system. Proportional elections are the only viable way to produce a legislature.

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

                  You’re presenting problems to abolishing the Senate that simply won’t exist because it’s a MUCH bigger undertaking than you’re presenting.

                  Republicans won’t be doing anything in that scenario because the fascists would literally revolt (while bankrolled by the rich) before they allow the Senate to be abolished.

    • if_you_can_keep_it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I guess the question is: what problem are you trying to solve by instituting age limits and term limits?

      If the issue is the advantage of incumbency and having entrenched politicians with large campaign funding operations behind them, then maybe a better way of solving this would be campaign finance reform that prevents private dollar donations from non-individuals and heavy restrictions on how much an individual can contribute.

      All that term limits and age limits in Congress would achieve is setting an artificial barrier for those who do the job well while setting up a new group of people to benefit from the legislature’s dysfunction.

      • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wouldn’t it be easier to “get your guy” in if they pushed rotate people through the Senate. Its not like either situation is good. But I don’t trust Nikki for shit. I still think she’s a stooge

      • Bonskreeskreeskree@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Power corrupts. The end. The longer you are in positions of power, the more exposure you have to influence from money. It needs to be a revolving door for every elected official. Get in. Do good things. Lead by example. Move on up or gtfo.

        • MonkRome@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I feel like that misses a lot about how politics work. Someone just getting into office is often far too ineffective for us to allow our system to be run by first and second term legislators. First term legislators are often fairly useless because they are still learning the job. I’m not saying there is no solution to that, but it would have to be coupled with massive reform around the support mechanisms for our legislatures. You think the federal government is slow moving now, just wait until everyone in office has no idea how to do their job.

          Edit: Also as others have pointed out, you’d also be terming very competent legislators along with the corrupt ones. I think people overestimate the amount of corruption in the legislative branch, due to the media creating a confirmation bias. For every evil corrupt piece of shit, there are 5-10 people you’ve never heard of just doing what they think is right (even if you don’t agree with them).

          Edit2: maybe a better solution is a dementia/Alzheimer’s in person test given to all legislators past 65 every year, evaluated by a 3 doctor panel. If you fail the test, you’re legally prevented from running and forced to resign if in office. If removed the political party impacted gets to appoint the replacement, otherwise if there is no political party (true independent) the executive branch of that state gets to appoint replacement.

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Places that have instituted term limits have found them to backfire. They have less effective legislators who are more corrupt.

          It makes sense when you think about who would be able to run constantly – rich, retired people.