• @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        To be fair, that’s about how long the typical android takes to reboot. Nothing exceptional.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      341 year ago

      I’d be very supportive of disallowing senior citizens from holding any public office.

      Very, very supportive.

      • Kernal64
        link
        fedilink
        English
        101 year ago

        65 is generally considered the retirement age, so my proposal that I responded to another comment with is that if you’re gonna turn 65 during your hypothetical term, you’re not eligible to run. It’s time to sail off into the sunset or sit on your porch to yell at the kids to stay off your lawn or whatever the hell. You’re no longer representative of the general population and are in no position to be crafting policy for years after your death. You did your service, now step aside and let the next generation have their turn.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          61 year ago

          65 is also, coincidentally, the age after which the majority of strokes occur in the US. Not to say we don’t have people who aren’t awesome senior citizens (far from it!) but the stakes are so damn high for people who are in government positions, especially when you have 6-year terms or lifetime appointments and your party really, REALLY wants to hold that seat.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -21 year ago

      She’s already said she won’t run at the next election.

      But if she steps down now, the republicans can refuse to let a new democrat sit on the judiciary committee (that she’s on), then the Republicans can just deadlock the vote to appoint any new federal judges (exactly like they did when she was on sick leave).

      The US political system is broken, but Feinstein is doing the best thing she can for her party and the people who voted for her.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Appointing a new committee member would require unanimous consent. Generally that’s easy - it’s a procedural step and the party in majority will ultimately get their way, so senators all give consent so they can get back to doing some actual work on the senate floor. But some first-term far-right republicans are withholding unanimous consent now, forcing the senate to decide if they want to waste days debating so they can vote, or just move on to something else.

          Eg, Senior military promotions require senate approval, and it’s typically a matter dealt with in a few minutes because the promotions are given unanimous consent. Senator Tuberville is a first-term MAGA Republican and an anti-abortion zealot. For months now, he has been blocking military promotions, demanding that the pentagon reverse their decision to allow service members to travel out-of-state if they require reproductive healthcare. Even if the other 99 senators approve of the promotions, to take a vote they would need to table it, go to committee, debate it, avoid a filibuster, and ultimately vote on it. So a task that should take minutes can instead turn up the senate for days or weeks, preventing the senate from getting anything else done in that time.