Schumer doesnāt need to just go, he needs to be prosecuted, removed and tossed in prison for violating our existing anti-genocide laws (leahy laws) and abetting multiple war crimes.
Fucking shit up already, Iām going to like this guy.
I really like him, I think he has a bright future in politics and I hope he becomes the first Muslim president.
But we already had Obama /s
You sonofabitch, Iām in.
How to get republicans claiming Michigan was actually part of Canada all along
I hope everyone else is as willing to fight this as I am. Contact your reps every day to demand they vote differently. This wave is only possible because of socialists.
EVERYBODY needs to look up their representatives and call or email
I did this week, I can handle doing it again next week
Hell yeah Van Halen, oh wait.
This guyās record is really good. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Van_Hollen#Political_positions
Yeah, Van Hollen is awesome.
How so?
He seems like a generally decent person, but I donāt understand where the excitement around him has come from. Hell, he was my representative for years, and I would struggle to recall much of anything that changed with him in office
Theres so few congresspeople that arent bought and paid for by AIPAC, so the field is pretty narrow. If we replace Schumer and Jeffries with clones of them, theres no point to any of this.
Thereās only so much that one US Senator can do for their constituents. The state and local legislatures have a more immediate impact on the lives of the average resident.
In federal office, they have to work within the consensus of all their colleagues from other states. And without a federal trifecta, itās difficult to push a bold agenda. Especially when weāre talking about progressive politicians, who have to work within a party that resists their policy proposals.
So Iām not sure how much you were expecting to tangibly change, or how much of that you can attribute to one Senator specifically.
But from my view, Van Hollen seems pretty genuine, heās consistent on what he stands for, and heās willing to help his constituents where he can. His heart is in the right place, and that puts him leagues ahead of most of his colleagues in my book. Even though he doesnāt do much pandering just to make a name for himself; which, again, I view as being to his merit.
His record as a senator isnāt as important (for the very valid reasons you mentioned), but he was both my representative in state senate and the House before being my senator. I lived in MD for a long time.
Not sure how much I agree when it comes to putting his name out there, though. Effective legislators ought to not only advocate for their constituents, but also make them aware of how they are fulfilling the mandate theyāve been given.
Ultimately though if my biggest criticism of the guy is āheās not very good at advertising himself,ā then I certainly can live with him as a potential majority leader. Absolutely beats Schumer, anyway. I mostly ask why people like him because itās bizarre seeing a (formerly) local politicianās name thrown around seemingly out of nowhere
I donāt personally consider self-promotion to be a requirement for effective congressional leadership. He doesnāt make headlines often, but when he does itās usually because heās standing up for something important.
I know there have already been some senators-elect who have mentioned him as a potential replacement for Schumer though. El-Sayed even said it.
But if you have anyone else you think would be better for the role, Iād be glad to hear your suggestions too
that sound like a good thing from a senator, heās not like Cruz, who is memorable for all the wrong reasons.
Indeed, hybrids with Indonesian and Dutch parents. They were treated horribly in the Netherlands and immigrated to the USA, the rest is history.
lol I know what you mean but itās impolite to use āhybridā when referring to people, even if itās typically a compliment from a botanical perspective
Like saying mixed is any better
Non extremist dutch are the exception in the US unfortunately.
maybe but look at the commies who do not support democrats lying about the democrats
what a surprise
there are much more calls from the dem base to get rid of the commie infestation
Is the commie infestation in the room with us now?
Well we are on Lemmy, so yes
The zionazi is back
Are there any communists in the dem party?
Thats a pretty hilarious question. The centrist positions are 2000ās era republicans, when they even bother to take any positions at all, which is pretty rare.
āDemocratic Socialistā == ācommieā to people who canāt define either socialism or communism.
Commie infestation? There are very few communist parties. Plus, Iām a communist because I believe in dismantling capitalism as a system.
I really hope that the establishment at least gets knocked out of leadership. We donāt want reforms; we want fundamental change. I feel honored about who I was able to vote for, and the fact that they ALL won their races. No more strongly worded letters! š”
What makes you think you represent the majority of voters?
People didnāt vote for the DSA, they voted against $6.00 gas.
What makes you think you represent the majority of voters?
Well you could just look up how the average American feels about universal healthcare.
Obama had both Houses and getting the ACA passed was in doubt until the last vote was in.
Trump can veto any Bill, and the Dems donāt have the votes to override.
Plenty of voters would like Medicare For All and improved schools, but theyāll never vote for a Dem because ācommunism.ā
Who said anything about the DSA? Affordability, Medicare for All, money out of politics. Most Democrat voters will get behind that. $6.00 gas was a rallying cry, sure.
Also, I didnāt say that I represent the majority of voters? In fact, I know that I do not represent the majority of voters.
Also, I didnāt say that I represent the majority of voters? In fact, I know that I do not represent the majority of voters.
Then why start a fight right away?
The new Congress hasnāt even been sworn in yet. Let the dust settle and see what happens.
Our focus should be on the GOP, not infighting
āwhy are you exercising your political rights and making your voice heard? You voted, thatās enough, now shut up until the next election.ā
No.
You have a right to bang your head into a wall.
Doesnāt make it a good idea.
Well you would know that, wouldnāt you.
Our focus should be on electing actual leaders, who will do what must be done to stop the GOP. Who said anything about infighting?
Then why start a fight right away?
?
The doomsaying trolls are coming out in force after this election, because a moment of optimism is intolerable to them.
Iāve added so many new user tags in the past few days alone.
Me too! Love that feature in Voyager. Sooooo many red tags recently.
Summit has it too! But Iām thinking of switching to voyager cause I like how it tracks how many times youāve personally upvoted/downvoted each user
Edit: oh I just realized Summit has that too and mine was just disabled, so I enabled it
We canāt focus on the gop when we have party leaders who do not want to focus on the gop.
Isnāt this whole article about jettisoning those party leaders? Some of the state leaders are pushing for that now. Thereās hope, and we need to support that.
What makes you think that the GOP gave one fuck about pushing to the right as hard as they could? Do you think they measured their victory margin? No. They went with Doge, tariffs, ICE immediately.
Dems need to push back just as hard to return us to the socialist paradise that was 2024. No wait, it wasnāt. It was justā¦ not proto fascist like now. Just return to the old status quo.
Great. Now we need someone spearheading an anti-Jeffries campaign.
Jeffries has never been Speaker of the House. Schumer has a long record as the Democratic leader in the Senate, and itās not a good one. If heās allowed to continue in that job then that seriously kneecaps any ability that the Democrats have to convince Americans that they can bring change. If they want to increase their gains in the Senate and establish a buffer against the inevitable Republican resurgence in the 2030s then itās critical that they show Schumer the door.
I wouldnāt object to ousting Jeffries, too, but if heās given a couple of years during a lame-duck Congress to fail properly it wouldnāt be a catastrophe. The focus needs to be on Schumer.
The focus needs to be on Schumer.
Keeping one to foul up the legislative system is almost as bad as keeping both. They both need to go. Enough with the half measures in the name of āfocusā. Lets do a full-assed job for once.
We donāt have time for any bullshit, which is exactly what the Jeffries campaign is.
It sounds like the DNC is focused on leaving Trump where he is, likely because they somehow think Vance being in office will make him more appealing in the upcoming 2028 election. Hence this first Jeffries statement that feels like heās talking sideways at the American people while communicating support for something else entirely.
Even so. We need someone non-establishment DNC. We The People donāt have time for any more shit. Life is barely possible as is.
I wouldnāt object to ousting Jeffries, too, but if heās given a couple of years during a lame-duck Congress to fail properly it wouldnāt be a catastrophe.
It absolutely would be. This is going to be a lame duck Congress, but there are things the Democrats can do and they absolutely need to be doing them if they want to maintain even a fraction of this momentum come 2028. Jeffries would slow down whatever progress can be made (particularly on the accountability front) and tank Congressās credibility with the electorate.
Exactly. Jeffries loses us all 2028 to whatever shit the GOP dreams up next. In other words, same old shit, different year, this vote essentially means nothing.
Thatās my guy!
I think people misunderstand what these roles actually do. Just hear me out. Schumer is directly responsible for our midterm victory. Now, the stars aligned in other ways, of course. Cost of living, hatred of the orange clown. Democrat voters were angry and mobilized.
Elections are money and strategy. And Chuck Schumer handled both. Two years ago, after the disaster of 2024, while everybody was screaming at Democrats to do something, Chuck Schumer opened a map of the United States. They decided to focus on deep red territories, territories that Dems thought were lost forever. Schumer LED the effort to scout new candidates, and he was very specific about it. He said, find me people that are not politicians, military, veterans, doctors, farmers, a Tejano music star. He knew the environment was right for these new candidates. In May 2025, Chuck watched a young, barely known state legislator give a five minute speech at a donor retreat. He said, that guyās gonna Flip Texas. Roy Cooper had no intention of running. Chuck took three trips to convince him. He ran, and he won. Same thing with Sherrod Brown. Schumer said, you are absolutely not retiring.
The Dem leadership was also incredibly intelligent with their money, because obviously nobody can outspend corporations. Instead of spending millions defending vulnerable incumbents, party would move money into deeper red territories and then pull those incumbent seats to see if they still needed money. This freed up millions of dollars to move around the map. Soon after that, diesel prices hit all time highs and everything clicked into place.
You might not like these establishment Dems, I donāt either, and thatās okay. Are Schumer and Jeffries my kind of politician? No. But do they know what theyāre doing? Yes. And many of you are single issue voters at this point, just like I am. Or you want investigation, subpoenas, and jail. I want to remind you that the house speaker and Senate leaders do not lead investigations. That is not their job. Their jobs are negotiation, strategy, and compromise. And if you want anything done in the next two years, you want to get a Bill or a law on the books, you want anybody impeached, we are going to need at least six Republicans to do anything. And you know how you get that done? Somebody like Nancy Pelosi. You probably donāt like her, she drive me nuts, but Nancy was probably the most effective and successful speaker of the house of all time. She was a freaking beast. Affordable Care Act, the American Rescue Plan, Infrastructure Act, CHIPS Act, inflation reduction. She got all of those done, you will never find a more Establishment Dem as her.
And as for retribution, the team is already assembled, and itās good. Garcia on the oversight and Government Reform Committee. Heās the one who told them all to lawyer up, and I believe him. Jared Huffman, National resources Committee. Itās gonna be the ballroom construction, money laundering, mineral deals. Bloomenthal, Homeland Security Committee. Thatās gonna be the real estate projects and crypto deals and many, many more.
Schumer is directly responsible for our midterm victory.
what a load of complete rubbish.
Youāre right about much of that ā as is The Atlantic article you clearly pulled from ā except for two things.
You left out the part about the very real power of those positions to control and modify legislation, and how it is the job of Senate Majority Leader and the Speaker of the House to control what legislation comes to the floor for a vote. Mike Johnson has spent the last two years not legislating, but blocking legislation, and Schumer and Jeffries have spent that same time caving to almost all of what the MAGA Republicans wanted.
You also left out the part about Schumerās and Jeffriesā cash and where it comes from, and how those big donors are their actual constituents and not the American people.
Honestly, when I read your comment, all I could think was, of course most of these legislators are good. (With the exception of Jeffries, who gave up before he even started.) Iād say some are even great. When it comes to doing what they do best, nobody beats Pelosi, and even Schumerās good.
Theyāre just not OURS. They work for others. Jeffriesā list of asinine moves is so long I donāt have time, so Iāll talk about Schumer. Schumer, for example, has said publicly that Israel is his priority. And we know thatās true because he makes absolutely sure that BILLIONS of American taxpayer dollars flow like water to Israel ā a country with excellent socialized healthcare and subsidized higher education ā so that Netanyahu can use it to commit genocide against their fellow humans while Israelis enjoy a basic standard of living that is much higher than that of the Americans who are paying for all of it.
When Trump cut off already-funded SNAP payments to hungry American families last November, and the Senate was keeping the government shut down to force the administration to follow the law, it was Chuck Schumer who orchestrated the reopening ā on the day the airlines shut down, which coincidentally, Iām sure, is not generally a problem for poor people on SNAP but a hell of an issue for people who run PACs. He tried to keep his name out of it, but Jeanne Shaheen, one of the nine senators who broke the deadlock, told reporters that the nine breaking ranks had done so with Schumerās knowledge and consent.
See how this works? Iād love to be a tech bro, or a crypto bro, or even just a regular Israeli, with Chuck Schumer as my senator. Hell, for all I know, maybe you are and you just donāt want the gravy train to end. I donāt expect Anduril and Palantir to hire a shitty rep: I expect them to get their moneyās worth out of Hakeem Jeffries and they certainly are.
But as an American I donāt fucking rate, and I donāt fucking forget, and I DONāT fucking support Chuck Schumer for Senate Majority Leader or Hakeem Jeffries for Speaker of the House.
TL;DR: If you want progressive goals and ideals to never cross a Congressional floor, keep Schumer and Jeffries in their current roles.
#nochuck #nohakeem
Hakeem Jeffries: https://www.change.org/p/house-democrats-choose-a-new-speaker (currently at 985K signatures)
Chuck Schumer: https://www.change.org/p/replace-chuck-schumer-as-senate-majority-leader (currently at 148K signatures)
As I wrote in the comment he is not my politician. I have the same issues as you with him. However, I think going in blind about whatās really happening makes any move lacking in reason and material evidence and arguments that are based in reality. Itās better to know what really is going on and argue from that standpoint rather than just have a knee-jerk reaction that ignores things.
For example, I donāt know anything about proposed alternative speakers, but I have seen people suggest that El-Sayed be the speakerā¦ Heās my kind of guy. He punches back speaks clearly and seems to be the kind of person that Iām like, but I feel like we barely know how he can operate as a savvy politician who needs to get a handful of Republicans on the Democrat side to finally bury Trump. That requires someone who really knows how to maneuver within the system. Chuck knows how to do that so Iāll give him that. But youāre absolutely right about all the other things that are terrible about him. Can we get someone whoās not terrible who can actually maneuver?
I donāt know about you but this is the first time Iāve heard about this Van Hollen character. Maybe I donāt follow inside baseball enough, and I certainly wouldnāt argue that we should keep Chuck because we know who he is. But I also donāt think just going in blind on some one. We donāt really know much about make sense either.
Amusing that you think Iām blind. Neither El-Sayed nor any of the new progressives can effectively be Speaker because they have not been in the Senate. You have to have spent at least some amount of time in the chamber to do the job. Itās not for beginners, and I never said it was.
And I also note that you have entirely ignored ā again ā the most salient points of all, which are the reasons WHY Schumer should not continue as Senate leader.
In the new Senate there are 57 Democratic senators, plus or minus, to choose from, along with an absolute wealth of collected wisdom there to help whoever is chosen, and the plain fact of the matter is that people get replaced all the time. Even politicians. And the world goes on, for better or for worse.
But it WILL NOT be Schumer if we are to have change.
From earlier this year:
āI have many jobs as [Senate] leaderā¦ and one is to fight for aid to Israel ā all the aid that Israel needs,ā Schumer said
āI will continue to fight for it,ā Schumer continued. āWe delivered more security assistance to Israel, our ally, than ever, ever before.ā
The US now has $40 TRILLION in debt and this motherfucker wants to continue to bleed us dry.
Tell you what. YOU, personally, can whip out your wallet, scrape everything you have out of it, send it to some Israeli defense fund, and rest easy in the knowledge that your own cash will be used to fund genocide.
I want no part of it. Stop coming at me with your willfully ignorant bullshit.
Wow, wtf? That was beyond
No. It really wasnāt.
There will not be a second Chuck Schumer: whoever gets selected will be his or her own self, with their own strengths and weaknesses. But that person will be the choice of their party, and have the help of those there ā including Schumer himself to help, if he is even a fraction of the citizen you think he is.
You elided past all the rest of what I wrote, so I came to the point: there are others who can do the job. I canāt name them, because it has to be someone the Senate likes personally and can get the votes, as well as who knows the Senate and the senators: all of this is something a noob canāt do. But even LBJ had to start somewhere.
My guess is that you are getting caught in the details as you write, but what you may not realize is that you are coming across as incredibly insulting. Those of us downvoting you are neither ignorant nor blind, for myself Iām probably three times older than you (at minimum), and it doesnāt take much to understand the basics of what a Senate Majority Leader does. But you donāt credit anyone else with even that much.
Meanwhile, a Senate Majority Leader can block as much legislation as he allows, and Schumer has done so in favor of Israel.
TL;DR: Better a lesser politician with full allegiance to his own country and people, than the best political operative with an allegiance to billionaires and Israel.
This^
This win had a lot more to do with MAGA incompetence and abuse than anything Schumer did. This was a visceral reaction to Trumpās abominable policies and breath-taking corruption than anything else.
Schmuck isnāt responsible for MAGA and SCOTUS gutting the Voting Rights Act, and mobilizing every back citizen to vote, for ICEās brownshirt behavior that mobilized every Latino to switch sides, for Trump deciding to start a war, mobilizing young people, Muslims, and America Firsters, for refusing to release the Epstein Files, mobilizing women and E-Files voters, etc.
People came out in massive numbers not because Schmuck picked good candidates, but because they wanted to crush MAGA. The Dems could have run toddlers, and they still would have won.
Donāt forget, he could have gotten one more win, if heād thrown some money at one of the candidates he DIDNT pick, Angi Nixon in Florida. He wouldnāt send her a penny, despite polls showing her within the margin of error.
Also remember that Schmuckās primary priorities are Israel, and Insider Trading. Thatās his entire motivation for staying in government. Heās rich enough, itās time to go.
Youāre assuming Chris Van Hollen canāt do those things and have a spine when it comes to Israel and progressive goals.
Schumer is good at politicking. Sure. That doesnāt mean there arenāt better people available.
You forget the sarcasm tag?
That is a lot of BS
Iām so glad we have such competent strategists. Iād be much more glad if they didnāt have a seat at Congress at all, so they can focus on strategy and leave politics to people that are clearly better at it than their inept asses.
No.
Hilarious.
The poster points out the Schumer is actually good at the job and goes on to explain how difficult it is to run the Senate. Do you have anyone else in mind who knows the job better?
Schumer IS actually good at the job and it IS difficult to run the Senate. Trumpās running the executive for Putin and his own family, and Schumerās running the Senate for Israel. Theyāre both doing really well for their employers, Schumer IS a gifted majority leader, and I continue to expect them both doing that same fine job for others for as long as they are in their roles.
But whoās going to run the Senate for Americans? Better a motivate, passionate American who is working for Americans than a great operator working for anyone else.
And you wanna know something? If Schumer is even a fraction of the American youāre holding him out to be, he will SUPPORT whoever is chosen, and work to strengthen that personās skill in whatever ways he can without shivving them in the back. But I wouldnāt hold my breath, and meanwhile the Senate is full of emeritus Dems who are wise and passionate and will make fantastic mentors for whoever is chosen.
deleted by creator
Did you not see the headline of the thread youāre on? Chris Van Hollen would be fine with me. A lot of people want Bernie, but heās 85 and his talents are best used exactly where they are, so itās not a realistic proposal. I would also be fine with Jeff Merkley or Elizabeth Warren, but again that may not be where their own talents or even desires lie. And of course LBJ is dead.
But at this point in my life, anyone still taking AIPAC money is not eligible. Sheldon Whitehouse would make a great Majority Leader in my opinion, for example, heās got the goods, but heās tainted by AIPAC. A lot of the good ones are. But progressives are all going to be hard NO on that, and even for me itās just a non-starter now.
Out of 57 senators, we can find one to do the job. Itās not like the one selected wonāt have help.
Read the title of the post.
Thank you.
All these people are acting like the war is over and we can stop fighting the GOP.
Trump still has the veto and if gas prices donāt come down this yearās win will be a blip.
And if Democrats donāt deliver on a progressive agenda then the voters wonāt turn out for them in future elections.
We can do multiple things at once, thatās why Congress has committees.
Serious question.
What makes you think that most voters care about a progressive agenda?
Every election Iāve seen makes me think that pocketbook issues are the most important.
I wonāt disagree that people mostly voted against the current conditions rather than for anything in particular.
But the progressive movement is good optics along those lines, and embracing younger and more progressive folks in high visibility positions is likely a good way to extend that feeling of āhope and changeā.
In practice, they may not get a lot of the agenda people would want through, but it sets a tone that things are actually being tried and makes it easier to squarely blame the president for lack of progress. At least until 2028ā¦
A progressive agenda is all about pocketbook issues.
You cannot be serious. Are you being disingenuous or are you truly this ill-informed?
Pocketbook issues are not what I see passion around on progressive-leaning lemmy. I see landlord hate (regardless of rent cost, or with magical thinking that if the hated people suffer then poof rent will go down), enthusiasm for trans people playing all sports at all levels (and if anyone has legit questions about related science they are worse than nazis), cop hate (no reform ideas, just burn them down), advocacy for violence against billionaires and CEOs (again, no reform ideas to prevent new people from doing the same evil things, and regardless if any specific act of violence would benefit anyoneās quality of life), etc.
If progressive agendas are about pocketbook issues, the majority of lemmy enthusiastics are terrible ambassadors for it.
enthusiasm for trans people playing all sports at all levels (and if anyone has legit questions about related science they are worse than nazis)
Iāve certainly never seen that. Iāve only seen people be shown the science around it and still double down on transphobic rants against it that donāt reflect the science.
are you doing a bit, or did you sign up for the wrong instance?
Sounds like youāre getting tunnel vision while examining the lunatic fringe under a microscope and then generalizing that as the entirety of progressivism.
Itās really just a caricature though, because the same edge lords that youāre describing would actually refer to most progressives as some variety of āneoliberal,ā āshitlib,ā or even āfascist.ā
Theyāre not serious, and the left would be better off without them. In fact I think most of them are plants.
But in case youāre not just being disingenuous and youāre actually curious about progressivism, then try reading about the policies advocated for by people like Bernie Sanders, AOC, Abdul El-Sayed, etcā¦
And then if you tell me with a straight face that those arenāt pocketbook issues, I wonāt believe you
Everyday I pray
For this little hour
Now the time has come
And I want you to stand by meBecause the train is coming baby
I said the train is coming now, now, now, now
I said the train is coming baby
And I am leaving on that train, LordSo, people get ready, thereās a train a-cominā
You donāt need no baggage, you just get on board
All you need is faith to hear the solar humminā
Donāt need no ticket, you just have to voteThere aināt no room for the hopeless tyrant
Who would hurt all mankind just to save his own, believe me now
Have pity on those whose chances grow thinner
For thereās no hiding place against the peopleās dome
