I admit that as an Elder Millennial I was starting to roll my eyes: yeah, yeah, younger generation wants older generation out (but doesn’t show up to vote in nearly the same numbers). But reading the whole article, I admit that eye roll was misplaced and I appreciate that Hogg articulates well that it’s not *just* about age. His willingness to admit and even champion nuance is refreshing. Thanks for writing!
I am 70 and agree with you. The older generation, like us, has to embrace the younger generation with their ideas and enthusiasm. Democrats are losing the young voters, especially young men, to the Republicans through people like Charlie Kirk and his Turning Point USA campus outreach and podcasters like Joe Rogan, etc. New blood and ideas are desperately needed.
Young women are still leaning left though, and I think this speaks to the anti-women rhetoric coming from people like Charlie Kirk. If young men like that rhetoric how does the left win them back without abandoning women? How do we ensure both sexes thrive?
I hear your point. I think young men want some place to belong, and as gross as it is, the right is giving them a place. I understand the need for the left to speak up for women and minorities, and I also see how men can misconstrue this advocacy as being anti-man. On the left we need a vision of what being a man looks like that embraces strength, courage, goodness, and faithfulness as well as tenderness and thoughtfulness.
I thought the same thing, but then the young men did not rally around Walz in the election. Women chose the nice guy but young men still chose the chauvinist. There has to be a reason. Maybe Walz wasn’t manly enough? I would love to hear feedback from that age group. It still feels like Dems are missing something in our messaging and representation with that cohort.
I think it’s a mix of breadth and time. The right has spent years building an entire media ecosystem on which young men can grow their identities. Tim Walz was one great example, but he wasn’t everywhere young men looked or listened, unlike the absolute web of media on the right. And an identity rooted in such a pervasive system isn’t going to change in just one election cycle, no matter how much we hoped Walz would change hearts.
I hope Dems can combine the forces of youthful enthusiasm and stamina with the savvy and experience of some incumbents to find a sweet spot. We’re seeing it in real time with the crowds garnered by Bernie and AOC’s rallies. And certainly a younger generation would be better at messaging in this 21st century media environment. But you have to admire David Hogg, who experienced the Parkland shooting trauma first hand and became an activist for gun legislation, an author and now one of the leaders of the Democratic Party.
I agree with this, combining the two. The Democrats need the youthful vitality and infusion of new ideas combined with the wisdom and expertise of those who have experience to guide, with AOC and Bernie being a good example.
I've been paying attention to David for the past several years. I admire his actions. He is right- our government needs younger leaders. But as he says- it's not just about age. Dead wood just floats along until it clogs up the stream. This is not the time. It is the time to pull that dead wood out and let progress flow forward .
I love what he's doing, and I support Kat Abughazaleh and AOC and all these other young challengers, too! The minute these elder electeds open their mouths, it becomes painfully obvious how out-of-touch they are with average Americans. Further, I'm sick of the insider trading, the way nearly all senators are personally wealthy. These people have no idea what it's like for people like me: laid-off, relying on my husband's contract income, paying for insurance myself that doesn't even cover the PCP I've had for a decade, still renting in our 40s because we've been unable to buy a home, watching inflation keep rising because of tariffs, wondering if public school services will still be available to my dyslexic daughter, worrying about the world my kids will inherit as it becomes more expensive and dangerous and exclusionary... And that's to say nothing of my fears for my queer and immigrant neighbors.
These elder congresspeople are utterly failing to meet the moment, and as Hogg says, they won't be around long enough to suffer the consequences of their inaction. We need people with skin in the game, people who will have to live with the effects of rising authoritarianism, the rollback of civil rights, income inequality, climate change, and more. I don't even need to agree with these younger challengers on all the issues - their perspective is closer to mine than a millionaire 80-year-old's will ever be. So let's clean house!
Well this was a lovely read! This sort of reform is exactly what I've been passionate about and somehow wasn't aware of these efforts. About time we saw this kind of energy in the party! Hogg's approach feels like what we need right now - not blindly rejecting experience, but bringing in fresh perspectives in safe districts where bold experimentation absolutely makes sense. That 30% approval rating among young voters should be terrifying party leadership. It terrifies me.
I'm glad they're speaking about this with sensitivity, but I think ageism is less of an issue with older voters than with older politicians. Post-Biden, I've only heard support for age limits (as well as term limits) on public office even from senior voters. I can’t speak for the perspective of all seniors, but every senior Democrat I know personally is practically begging the next generation to step in and save us.
I particularly like Hogg's framing around "ineffective vs. effective" rather than just old vs. young - that's smart messaging that avoids alienating older supporters. Reaching the end of your term doesn’t mean your experience goes out the door, you can still stick around and have a role in other ways, but there has to always be room for new names and faces so that voters aren’t doubting whether their representatives are fighting for them (as opposed to fighting for their party).
I was pretty convinced that a third party was going to be necessary because reforming the Democratic Party seemed like a fool's errand, but if they can demonstrate a meaningful shift in leadership through efforts like this, I could definitely be persuaded to stick around. But I guess Jeffries and Martin have their say in that. The donation to the DCCC while simultaneously challenging the status quo shows Hogg can play both the inside and outside game. I just hope party leadership makes the right call so that MAGA's days of control are over by January 2027. If they want midterm voters to see status quo on the ballot again, we might see even more MAGA support than we already do.
I think the low approval ratings, especially among young people, are much less a reflection of Democratic policies and much more a reflection of the anger and fear regarding Trump's actions and the perception that older Democratic politicians are being too passive. I'm not a young person but even I answered a poll recently by saying I strongly disapproved of the Democratic Party, simply because there are not nearly enough people in it willing to stand up and fight openly, though more and more are starting to get it. J.B. Pritzker is not young but his speech the other day was just the kind of fire Dems need. I don't think the party as a whole needs to be reformed at all. As poll after poll shows, its policies and legislative achievements are approved by a majority of Americans and they're the only party looking out for the poor and the middle class. Their efforts to combat lies, misinformation and disinformation, however, have been a dismal failure and I believe that Hogg's organization will result in younger, tech-savvy Democrats who can change that.
It’s the adage “the medium is the message”, right? Even if you took Hogg’s words and put them in Schumer’s mouth, people aren’t going to believe him. And it’s also about combatting Americans’ distrust for political parties in general. If the voters can witness something tangible, like incumbent turnover, they’ll be more inclined to believe there’s a conversation happening between voters and representatives. That’s the status quo i’m talking about: not policy, but entrenched power structures, where candidates fail upward as they get older and more out of touch.
The mainstream media needs to step up too! I’m flabbergasted how the major news orgs are so easily bullied into silence right now. We need more Scott Pelleys and fewer CEOs.
Unfortunately that which makes mainstream media "mainstream" is their revenue structure. They need corporate money to exist. What's happening at 60 Minutes is only the most evident example of what's happening everywhere, at every mainstream news organization, ever increasingly, but now turbocharged because the current president is openly threatening financial ruin for organizations that counter his narrative. Only the handful of brave journalists who stand up to their billionaire owners are keeping the whole system from crashing. Meanwhile, more and more Americans are turning to oversimplified memes for their news diet. More than ever, it's time to support our publicly funded and independent journalism projects. (Preaching to the choir I'm sure, given the medium for this conversation!)
We need the citizens to remember they have the right to free speech and the right to protest peacefully. The louder they speak and when multitudes protest we can counter the current narratives. Think the Suffragettes and Civil Rights. Sanity can prevail. (Sorry, I’m 79 and don’t have much time to see sanity return)
As always, Timothy, I love your insight. This topic always brings to mind the fact that "age is not a precursor to wisdom." I know many young people who are 'wise', and many older folks who are--to put it politely--not wise. By the same token, I do have some concerns that David Hogg's message will too often come across as simply ageism. I also know some younger people who are not wise. I feel it would be more productive if the foundational message was new *ideas*. However, while Mr. Hogg promotes support for a few specific elder statesmen, his overall message carries a theme of new *blood.*
In the recent past, we have seen certain groups/movements promote candidates based in part on their gender or race. This can pigeonhole a candidate. It's one of the reasons that Kamala Harris avoided--at all cost--to refer to herself as the "female candidate." Unfortunately, many of her supporters couldn't resist. Hillary Clinton ran on this premise, and found out that it trivialized her candidacy. In past conversations with fellow Dems, I often heard people say, "I'm voting for [her] because we need a female's perspective in the Oval office." Really? So, if the 2028 election comes down to (play along with me here) Gavin Newsom vs. Pam Bondi...?? I think you get my point.
I do agree that in an effort to recruit candidates with fresh, bold ideas (which I personally support) the DNC needs to draw from the most obvious pool. Young people. But they have to temper their message on this specific aspect. Otherwise, "age" becomes the platform.
The DNC is woefully unaware of how unpopular their approach has been for awhile now. Everything that Hogg is saying has become very popular amongst voters. I really hope the DNC sees this and sees that they would be far more successful swinging hard left on issues and candidates. Younger candidates have been successful and encouraged by voters, but not by leadership. Something has got to change.
I'm 74 and I'm one of those who find it hard to support the Democratic party. I fully support Mr. Hogg. I wonder how long it'll be before the DNC kicks him out? Doesn't matter. I'll follow him and NOT the DNC.
This mindset is also known as “shit or get off the pot” - I actually think a lot of older generations would find it extremely refreshing to hear such frank speech- I’ve heard that phrase more times than I can count from them so that should be right in line with the MO!
David is certainly stirring the pot with his PAC and I admire him for it. I hope younger elected officials that are the result of his efforts, in addition to supporting gun legislation, etc., also work to end Citizens United.
Both parties should consider his argument. The world is changing rapidly and our parent’s generation is so far removed from what we faced, much less what our children are facing. If they are not able to listen to the younger generation and uplift their voices in a notable way they should step down. However, here in Alabama, it doesn’t matter if you are young or old, the Trump line is the only line you toe. I’ve reached out to my senators and representatives and IF I get a response it is a canned email singing the same old tired song. Biden put us in a horrible mess, (me: ok, let’s move on) Trump is getting us out of it (me: but let’s do that lawfully please), we are within our legal right and you’re being duped by the media (me: eye roll, let me name all the reasons you are wrong). While I like Hogg’s argument, when you get down to the root of it, we need a swing back to neutrality in both parties in order to have some semblance of normal democracy again. If our younger generations could work toward true democracy where conversations don’t look like yelling on national television and dehumanizing entire people groups then let’s get them in there. I would support that.
I’m 74 and support Hogg’s endeavor. Status quo is not working. Ideally, dems could combine the wisdom of older members with the energy and forward thinking of younger members - for a win overall.
This is it exactly. I'm 40. I think it's crucial to have younger voices in Congress to give a different perspective and give different energy (and I say different because an increased age does not necessarily equal less energy). But perhaps even more critical than that, it is vital to have young leaders coming in NOW so that they can gain experience while still having the benefit of working with older leaders that won't be there one day. When I started my job fresh out of college, I was the youngest person at my small company by about 20 or 25 years. My coworkers were a wealth of knowledge and real-world experience that I found incredibly beneficial. And on the flip side, with a fresh perspective, I sometimes offered alternatives to the "we've always done it this way attitude" if I saw another potential way for something to work and that was also well received and often implemented to great success. That's how it should be...that's how we grow and thrive and continue. There are some things that will stand the test of time...that truly should "always be done that way" but there are MANY things that need to evolve and adapt. We have to be open to that happening and put people in place who can work that way.
Is there an analysis of what the age range was on average of people in congress when these older incumbents were coming up? When they entered office was there another defined moment like this where a generational shift had to happen with a lot of freshman congresspeople?
I believe this is what the Democratic party needs. For too long, the Dems have coasted along as being on the "right side" of the culture wars, while still continuing to quietly accept corporate donations and not fight for the things we actually need - Citizens United overturned, campaign finance reform, electoral college reform, etc. etc. etc. - because they know those things would also threaten their own power, in addition to Republicans' power. It's time to recognize what's happening, it's time for some of these people to step aside, and frankly, I welcome the younger voices if they're willing to fight for the things that actually matter and impact everyday Americans. Maybe what the Dems need *is* this message - very specific policies that the majority of Americans agree with but few in power are willing to fight for.
I admit that as an Elder Millennial I was starting to roll my eyes: yeah, yeah, younger generation wants older generation out (but doesn’t show up to vote in nearly the same numbers). But reading the whole article, I admit that eye roll was misplaced and I appreciate that Hogg articulates well that it’s not *just* about age. His willingness to admit and even champion nuance is refreshing. Thanks for writing!
I am 73. I will donate to Hogg’s pac.
I am 70 and agree with you. The older generation, like us, has to embrace the younger generation with their ideas and enthusiasm. Democrats are losing the young voters, especially young men, to the Republicans through people like Charlie Kirk and his Turning Point USA campus outreach and podcasters like Joe Rogan, etc. New blood and ideas are desperately needed.
Young women are still leaning left though, and I think this speaks to the anti-women rhetoric coming from people like Charlie Kirk. If young men like that rhetoric how does the left win them back without abandoning women? How do we ensure both sexes thrive?
I hear your point. I think young men want some place to belong, and as gross as it is, the right is giving them a place. I understand the need for the left to speak up for women and minorities, and I also see how men can misconstrue this advocacy as being anti-man. On the left we need a vision of what being a man looks like that embraces strength, courage, goodness, and faithfulness as well as tenderness and thoughtfulness.
Honestly sounds like Tim Waltz characteristics & what made him appealing
I thought the same thing, but then the young men did not rally around Walz in the election. Women chose the nice guy but young men still chose the chauvinist. There has to be a reason. Maybe Walz wasn’t manly enough? I would love to hear feedback from that age group. It still feels like Dems are missing something in our messaging and representation with that cohort.
I think it’s a mix of breadth and time. The right has spent years building an entire media ecosystem on which young men can grow their identities. Tim Walz was one great example, but he wasn’t everywhere young men looked or listened, unlike the absolute web of media on the right. And an identity rooted in such a pervasive system isn’t going to change in just one election cycle, no matter how much we hoped Walz would change hearts.
I 100% support this! While I am 49, I agree with the statements about not feeling represented by DNC for years. Change is definitely needed!!
I hope Dems can combine the forces of youthful enthusiasm and stamina with the savvy and experience of some incumbents to find a sweet spot. We’re seeing it in real time with the crowds garnered by Bernie and AOC’s rallies. And certainly a younger generation would be better at messaging in this 21st century media environment. But you have to admire David Hogg, who experienced the Parkland shooting trauma first hand and became an activist for gun legislation, an author and now one of the leaders of the Democratic Party.
I agree with this, combining the two. The Democrats need the youthful vitality and infusion of new ideas combined with the wisdom and expertise of those who have experience to guide, with AOC and Bernie being a good example.
I've been paying attention to David for the past several years. I admire his actions. He is right- our government needs younger leaders. But as he says- it's not just about age. Dead wood just floats along until it clogs up the stream. This is not the time. It is the time to pull that dead wood out and let progress flow forward .
FYI- I am 70.
I love what he's doing, and I support Kat Abughazaleh and AOC and all these other young challengers, too! The minute these elder electeds open their mouths, it becomes painfully obvious how out-of-touch they are with average Americans. Further, I'm sick of the insider trading, the way nearly all senators are personally wealthy. These people have no idea what it's like for people like me: laid-off, relying on my husband's contract income, paying for insurance myself that doesn't even cover the PCP I've had for a decade, still renting in our 40s because we've been unable to buy a home, watching inflation keep rising because of tariffs, wondering if public school services will still be available to my dyslexic daughter, worrying about the world my kids will inherit as it becomes more expensive and dangerous and exclusionary... And that's to say nothing of my fears for my queer and immigrant neighbors.
These elder congresspeople are utterly failing to meet the moment, and as Hogg says, they won't be around long enough to suffer the consequences of their inaction. We need people with skin in the game, people who will have to live with the effects of rising authoritarianism, the rollback of civil rights, income inequality, climate change, and more. I don't even need to agree with these younger challengers on all the issues - their perspective is closer to mine than a millionaire 80-year-old's will ever be. So let's clean house!
Let’s clean house! 🙌👏
Missy, I love what you said, especially your last paragraph!
Well this was a lovely read! This sort of reform is exactly what I've been passionate about and somehow wasn't aware of these efforts. About time we saw this kind of energy in the party! Hogg's approach feels like what we need right now - not blindly rejecting experience, but bringing in fresh perspectives in safe districts where bold experimentation absolutely makes sense. That 30% approval rating among young voters should be terrifying party leadership. It terrifies me.
I'm glad they're speaking about this with sensitivity, but I think ageism is less of an issue with older voters than with older politicians. Post-Biden, I've only heard support for age limits (as well as term limits) on public office even from senior voters. I can’t speak for the perspective of all seniors, but every senior Democrat I know personally is practically begging the next generation to step in and save us.
I particularly like Hogg's framing around "ineffective vs. effective" rather than just old vs. young - that's smart messaging that avoids alienating older supporters. Reaching the end of your term doesn’t mean your experience goes out the door, you can still stick around and have a role in other ways, but there has to always be room for new names and faces so that voters aren’t doubting whether their representatives are fighting for them (as opposed to fighting for their party).
I was pretty convinced that a third party was going to be necessary because reforming the Democratic Party seemed like a fool's errand, but if they can demonstrate a meaningful shift in leadership through efforts like this, I could definitely be persuaded to stick around. But I guess Jeffries and Martin have their say in that. The donation to the DCCC while simultaneously challenging the status quo shows Hogg can play both the inside and outside game. I just hope party leadership makes the right call so that MAGA's days of control are over by January 2027. If they want midterm voters to see status quo on the ballot again, we might see even more MAGA support than we already do.
I think the low approval ratings, especially among young people, are much less a reflection of Democratic policies and much more a reflection of the anger and fear regarding Trump's actions and the perception that older Democratic politicians are being too passive. I'm not a young person but even I answered a poll recently by saying I strongly disapproved of the Democratic Party, simply because there are not nearly enough people in it willing to stand up and fight openly, though more and more are starting to get it. J.B. Pritzker is not young but his speech the other day was just the kind of fire Dems need. I don't think the party as a whole needs to be reformed at all. As poll after poll shows, its policies and legislative achievements are approved by a majority of Americans and they're the only party looking out for the poor and the middle class. Their efforts to combat lies, misinformation and disinformation, however, have been a dismal failure and I believe that Hogg's organization will result in younger, tech-savvy Democrats who can change that.
It’s the adage “the medium is the message”, right? Even if you took Hogg’s words and put them in Schumer’s mouth, people aren’t going to believe him. And it’s also about combatting Americans’ distrust for political parties in general. If the voters can witness something tangible, like incumbent turnover, they’ll be more inclined to believe there’s a conversation happening between voters and representatives. That’s the status quo i’m talking about: not policy, but entrenched power structures, where candidates fail upward as they get older and more out of touch.
The mainstream media needs to step up too! I’m flabbergasted how the major news orgs are so easily bullied into silence right now. We need more Scott Pelleys and fewer CEOs.
Unfortunately that which makes mainstream media "mainstream" is their revenue structure. They need corporate money to exist. What's happening at 60 Minutes is only the most evident example of what's happening everywhere, at every mainstream news organization, ever increasingly, but now turbocharged because the current president is openly threatening financial ruin for organizations that counter his narrative. Only the handful of brave journalists who stand up to their billionaire owners are keeping the whole system from crashing. Meanwhile, more and more Americans are turning to oversimplified memes for their news diet. More than ever, it's time to support our publicly funded and independent journalism projects. (Preaching to the choir I'm sure, given the medium for this conversation!)
We need the citizens to remember they have the right to free speech and the right to protest peacefully. The louder they speak and when multitudes protest we can counter the current narratives. Think the Suffragettes and Civil Rights. Sanity can prevail. (Sorry, I’m 79 and don’t have much time to see sanity return)
I'll do everything I can to make your 80s as sane as possible, Susan! 🇺🇸
As always, Timothy, I love your insight. This topic always brings to mind the fact that "age is not a precursor to wisdom." I know many young people who are 'wise', and many older folks who are--to put it politely--not wise. By the same token, I do have some concerns that David Hogg's message will too often come across as simply ageism. I also know some younger people who are not wise. I feel it would be more productive if the foundational message was new *ideas*. However, while Mr. Hogg promotes support for a few specific elder statesmen, his overall message carries a theme of new *blood.*
In the recent past, we have seen certain groups/movements promote candidates based in part on their gender or race. This can pigeonhole a candidate. It's one of the reasons that Kamala Harris avoided--at all cost--to refer to herself as the "female candidate." Unfortunately, many of her supporters couldn't resist. Hillary Clinton ran on this premise, and found out that it trivialized her candidacy. In past conversations with fellow Dems, I often heard people say, "I'm voting for [her] because we need a female's perspective in the Oval office." Really? So, if the 2028 election comes down to (play along with me here) Gavin Newsom vs. Pam Bondi...?? I think you get my point.
I do agree that in an effort to recruit candidates with fresh, bold ideas (which I personally support) the DNC needs to draw from the most obvious pool. Young people. But they have to temper their message on this specific aspect. Otherwise, "age" becomes the platform.
The DNC is woefully unaware of how unpopular their approach has been for awhile now. Everything that Hogg is saying has become very popular amongst voters. I really hope the DNC sees this and sees that they would be far more successful swinging hard left on issues and candidates. Younger candidates have been successful and encouraged by voters, but not by leadership. Something has got to change.
I'm 74 and I'm one of those who find it hard to support the Democratic party. I fully support Mr. Hogg. I wonder how long it'll be before the DNC kicks him out? Doesn't matter. I'll follow him and NOT the DNC.
This mindset is also known as “shit or get off the pot” - I actually think a lot of older generations would find it extremely refreshing to hear such frank speech- I’ve heard that phrase more times than I can count from them so that should be right in line with the MO!
David is certainly stirring the pot with his PAC and I admire him for it. I hope younger elected officials that are the result of his efforts, in addition to supporting gun legislation, etc., also work to end Citizens United.
Both parties should consider his argument. The world is changing rapidly and our parent’s generation is so far removed from what we faced, much less what our children are facing. If they are not able to listen to the younger generation and uplift their voices in a notable way they should step down. However, here in Alabama, it doesn’t matter if you are young or old, the Trump line is the only line you toe. I’ve reached out to my senators and representatives and IF I get a response it is a canned email singing the same old tired song. Biden put us in a horrible mess, (me: ok, let’s move on) Trump is getting us out of it (me: but let’s do that lawfully please), we are within our legal right and you’re being duped by the media (me: eye roll, let me name all the reasons you are wrong). While I like Hogg’s argument, when you get down to the root of it, we need a swing back to neutrality in both parties in order to have some semblance of normal democracy again. If our younger generations could work toward true democracy where conversations don’t look like yelling on national television and dehumanizing entire people groups then let’s get them in there. I would support that.
Agree with you entirely!
Well, when we can’t get term limits in place… 🤷🏻♀️I’m glad he’s doing this.
I’m 74 and support Hogg’s endeavor. Status quo is not working. Ideally, dems could combine the wisdom of older members with the energy and forward thinking of younger members - for a win overall.
This is it exactly. I'm 40. I think it's crucial to have younger voices in Congress to give a different perspective and give different energy (and I say different because an increased age does not necessarily equal less energy). But perhaps even more critical than that, it is vital to have young leaders coming in NOW so that they can gain experience while still having the benefit of working with older leaders that won't be there one day. When I started my job fresh out of college, I was the youngest person at my small company by about 20 or 25 years. My coworkers were a wealth of knowledge and real-world experience that I found incredibly beneficial. And on the flip side, with a fresh perspective, I sometimes offered alternatives to the "we've always done it this way attitude" if I saw another potential way for something to work and that was also well received and often implemented to great success. That's how it should be...that's how we grow and thrive and continue. There are some things that will stand the test of time...that truly should "always be done that way" but there are MANY things that need to evolve and adapt. We have to be open to that happening and put people in place who can work that way.
Is there an analysis of what the age range was on average of people in congress when these older incumbents were coming up? When they entered office was there another defined moment like this where a generational shift had to happen with a lot of freshman congresspeople?
Would love to hear Sharon dive into this!
Breath. Of. Fresh. Air. 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
I believe this is what the Democratic party needs. For too long, the Dems have coasted along as being on the "right side" of the culture wars, while still continuing to quietly accept corporate donations and not fight for the things we actually need - Citizens United overturned, campaign finance reform, electoral college reform, etc. etc. etc. - because they know those things would also threaten their own power, in addition to Republicans' power. It's time to recognize what's happening, it's time for some of these people to step aside, and frankly, I welcome the younger voices if they're willing to fight for the things that actually matter and impact everyday Americans. Maybe what the Dems need *is* this message - very specific policies that the majority of Americans agree with but few in power are willing to fight for.