510
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2026
510 points (99.6% liked)
politics
31775 readers
3238 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
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 guy's 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 don't either, and that's okay. Are Schumer and Jeffries my kind of politician? No. But do they know what they're 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 don't 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 it's good. Garcia on the oversight and Government Reform Committee. He's the one who told them all to lawyer up, and I believe him. Jared Huffman, National resources Committee. It's gonna be the ballroom construction, money laundering, mineral deals. Bloomenthal, Homeland Security Committee. That's gonna be the real estate projects and crypto deals and many, many more.
You're right about much of that -- as is The Atlantic article you clearly pulled from -- 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 Schumer's and Jeffries' 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.) I'd say some are even great. When it comes to doing what they do best, nobody beats Pelosi, and even Schumer's good.
They're just not OURS. They work for others. Jeffries' list of asinine moves is so long I don't have time, so I'll talk about Schumer. Schumer, for example, has said publicly that Israel is his priority. And we know that's true because he makes absolutely sure that BILLIONS of American taxpayer dollars flow like water to Israel -- a country with excellent socialized healthcare and subsidized higher education -- 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 -- on the day the airlines shut down, which coincidentally, I'm 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 Schumer's knowledge and consent.
See how this works? I'd 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 don't want the gravy train to end. I don't expect Anduril and Palantir to hire a shitty rep: I expect them to get their money's worth out of Hakeem Jeffries and they certainly are.
But as an American I don't fucking rate, and I don't fucking forget, and I DON'T 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)
This^
This win had a lot more to do with MAGA incompetence and abuse than anything Schumer did. This was a visceral reaction to Trump's abominable policies and breath-taking corruption than anything else.
Schmuck isn't responsible for MAGA and SCOTUS gutting the Voting Rights Act, and mobilizing every back citizen to vote, for ICE's 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.
Don't forget, he could have gotten one more win, if he'd thrown some money at one of the candidates he DIDNT pick, Angi Nixon in Florida. He wouldn't send her a penny, despite polls showing her within the margin of error.
Also remember that Schmuck's primary priorities are Israel, and Insider Trading. That's his entire motivation for staying in government. He's rich enough, it's time to go.
You’re assuming Chris Van Hollen can’t do those things and have a spine when it comes to Israel and progressive goals.
Schumer is good at politicking. Sure. That doesn’t mean there aren’t better people available.
You forget the sarcasm tag?
That is a lot of BS
I'm so glad we have such competent strategists. I'd be much more glad if they didn't 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. Trump's running the executive for Putin and his own family, and Schumer's running the Senate for Israel. They're 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 who's 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 you're holding him out to be, he will SUPPORT whoever is chosen, and work to strengthen that person's skill in whatever ways he can without shivving them in the back. But I wouldn't 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.
Did you not see the headline of the thread you're on? Chris Van Hollen would be fine with me. A lot of people want Bernie, but he's 85 and his talents are best used exactly where they are, so it's 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, he's got the goods, but he's 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 it's just a non-starter now.
Out of 57 senators, we can find one to do the job. It's not like the one selected won't 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 don't come down this year's win will be a blip.
And if Democrats don't deliver on a progressive agenda then the voters won't turn out for them in future elections.
We can do multiple things at once, that's why Congress has committees.
Serious question.
What makes you think that most voters care about a progressive agenda?
Every election I've seen makes me think that pocketbook issues are the most important.
A progressive agenda is all about pocketbook issues.
You cannot be serious. Are you being disingenuous or are you truly this ill-informed?