Democrats’ increasingly frantic—and ageist—plans to maintain power

 In Virginia, Americans have seen the lengths to which the Democrat party will go on an unbridled quest, using raw political power to gerrymander (thankfully, temporarily) redistricting congressional seats to make it virtually impossible for Republicans to win. In fact, the powerful Democrat leader of the Virginia Senate, L. Louise Lucas, “used her authority as chair of the Senate Committee on Finance and Appropriations and pressured Democrats and Republicans alike with ‘10–1’ memes and some uncensored profanity.”

When the attempt was thrown out by the VA Supreme Court, it was quickly suggested that the legislative branch, with both Houses controlled by Democrats, could vote to remove all seven Supreme Court judges, beginning at 54 years and older.

But a much more thoughtful Democrat leader saved them from this very, very bad idea:

When asked on Monday whether there is any consideration of the proposal in the General Assembly, Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell bluntly rejected the idea.

“We adhere to certain norms and a rule of law in our commonwealth,” Surovell said, “and I think that throwing out the entire Supreme Court, including the first Black woman chief justice in 250 years after she’s been on the job for three months, would be a pretty extreme overreaction to what many of us view as a wrongfully decided opinion.”

And that was that until the New Republic entered with a symbolic call to arms, quoting Shakespeare’s epic play Hamlet: “whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take up arms against a sea of troubles—and by opposing, end them.”

The reporter resurrected the Democrat ageism gambit at a national level. He made his very best cogent case, and OK, fine, he has every right to do just that.

But what the VA Senate Majority Leader astutely figured out was that retiring well-respected judges 54 years and older would symbolize the most power-crazed example of ageism in American history.

The New Republic is a very serious, well-respected magazine in liberal circles. Nevertheless, that same outlet had a huge scandal with a reporter doing mostly anti-conservative, fabulist narrative news. The New Republic’s lying reporter foreshadowed today’s many narrative news stories made up and/or poorly edited in both written articles, along with biased MSM television reporting:

At 25, Stephen Glass was the most sought-after young reporter in the nation's capital, producing knockout articles for magazines ranging from The New Republic to Rolling Stone. Trouble was, he made things up—sources, quotes, whole stories—in a breathtaking web of deception that emerged as the most sustained fraud in modern journalism.

Given that history, it seems unsurprising that, just when the Virginia ageism gambit failed, it was brought back and reported in the New Republic to be taken very seriously:

As Quinn Yeargain at The Downballot reported, the state constitution includes a provision that allows lawmakers to change the mandatory retirement age of state Supreme Court justices.

The idea Yeargain poses would be to lower the official retirement age to 54 by placing a modification in the annual budget bill that’s due by June 30, pass the legislation, and replace the hack justices—all of whom are older than 54—with seven new ones picked by Spanberger.

If the Democrat Party wants to be the political force endorsing ageism, then so be it. But does the Democrat Party really wish to brand its party as using ageism to accomplish raw political power?

If so, it is very sad for them.

As of April 2026, there are 105,140,000 Americans aged 54 or older. That age cohort represents a highly influential demographic, holding over 83% of the nation’s wealth.

According to the American Society on Aging:

Ageism refers to stereotypes (how we think), prejudice (how we feel) and discrimination (how we act) toward others or oneself based on age.

How Ageism Impacts Us

● A 2020 poll found that 82% of adults ages 50 to 80 experience ageism daily. Those experiencing multiple forms of ageism are more likely to have chronic health conditions and depression.

● Ageism intersects with, and worsens, other discriminatory “isms,” including racism, sexism, and ableism. Multiple intersecting forms of bias compound disadvantages and worsen the effects of ageism on individuals’ health and well-being.

Meanwhile, we don’t actually know what California has in mind with its raw use of political power to thwart voters who dare oppose it. Gavin Newsom has said the Democrats have a “break the glass” plan if the upcoming gubernatorial primary doesn’t go the Democrats’ way, but he’s closed-mouthed about what the plan is. The New York Times, however, thinks it knows:

Democratic Angst Could Lead California to Change Its Primary Rules

The prospect of Democrats getting shut out of the general election for governor has spurred an effort to eliminate the state’s “top-two” open primary approach.

Ironically, it was the Democrats who pushed the jungle primary when they thought they could never lose.

Americans believe in fair play, so right now, which side of history does the Democrat Party fall on?

Image created using AI.

Ed Timperlake is a proud Va HS graduate from Newport News and was appointed to the Naval Academy by President Johnson.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2026/05/the_democrats_increasingly_frantic_and_ageist_plans_to_maintain_power.html