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.
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 what’s really happening makes any move lacking in reason and material evidence and arguments that are based in reality. It’s 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 don’t know anything about proposed alternative speakers, but I have seen people suggest that El-Sayed be the speaker… He’s my kind of guy. He punches back speaks clearly and seems to be the kind of person that I’m 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 I’ll give him that. But you’re absolutely right about all the other things that are terrible about him. Can we get someone who’s not terrible who can actually maneuver?
I don’t know about you but this is the first time I’ve heard about this Van Hollen character. Maybe I don’t follow inside baseball enough, and I certainly wouldn’t argue that we should keep Chuck because we know who he is. But I also don’t think just going in blind on some one. We don’t really know much about make sense either.
Amusing that you think I’m 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. It’s not for beginners, and I never said it was.
And I also note that you have entirely ignored – again – 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.
“I have many jobs as [Senate] leader… and one is to fight for aid to Israel — all the aid that Israel needs,” Schumer said
“I will continue to fight for it,” Schumer continued. “We delivered more security assistance to Israel, our ally, than ever, ever before.”
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.
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 – 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 can’t 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 can’t 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 I’m probably three times older than you (at minimum), and it doesn’t take much to understand the basics of what a Senate Majority Leader does. But you don’t credit anyone else with even that much.
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 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.
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.
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.
I won’t 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 “hope and change”.
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 2028…
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 anyone’s 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)
I’ve certainly never seen that. I’ve only seen people be shown the science around it and still double down on transphobic rants against it that don’t reflect the science.
The transphobes ready to do pile-on rants given the smallest openings is part of what drives the denial of science uncertainty on the pro-trans side: any admission there is more to learn is, unfortunately, not taken as nuance but instead used to springboard unfounded attacks.
density was “partially recovered” after a transgender child shifted from puberty blockers to gender-affirming hormone therapy.
The reduced bone density in recently transitioned teens is not a risk for them in their youth or middle age. The risk is that the only partially recovered density sets them up for higher rates of osteoporosis and debilitating bone fractures in their 60s and up. Definitive answers won’t be available - leaving the science unsettled - until they reach their 60s several decades from now.
Like I said, I’ve never seen a denial of science from trans people. I’ve ready many journals and studies, and they all seem to support the understanding that transitioning changes our physical abilities. Trans women often score around the same, sometimes higher, sometimes lower with other cis women in a range of variables - but overall comparable. We certainly need more studies into things such as timelines for HRT changes as studies cut-off after 3 years, or the effects of Progesterone - but the science of the sports debate is much clearer.
As for the puberty blocker/bone density thing he easy solution is to allow children to access HRT and go through the correct puberty. Puberty blockers largely exist as a political compromise with cis people over the ownership of our bodies.
Also them.us (pinknews, and one other that escape me) are considered to be a bit transphobic out of most queer media.
I wanted a smaller instance, but one with stable presence likely to be durable, and was impressed with the instance governing system. The average instance member also tends IMO to be more thoughtful and more likely to help me learn and make me think even if I disagree with their position. I am appreciative to be here as long as the flotilla will have me!
Sounds like you’re getting tunnel vision while examining the lunatic fringe under a microscope and then generalizing that as the entirety of progressivism.
It’s really just a caricature though, because the same edge lords that you’re describing would actually refer to most progressives as some variety of “neoliberal,” “shitlib,” or even “fascist.”
They’re not serious, and the left would be better off without them. In fact I think most of them are plants.
But in case you’re not just being disingenuous and you’re actually curious about progressivism, then try reading about the policies advocated for by people like Bernie Sanders, AOC, Abdul El-Sayed, etc…
And then if you tell me with a straight face that those aren’t pocketbook issues, I won’t believe you
Unfortunately the lunatic fringe is loud. The most numerous comments I read on lemmy about AOC call her a sellout for the compromises she makes to get things done for her constituents. The most numerous comments I read about Bernie are conspiracy theories about his primary loss to Hillary Clinton. El-Sayed is too new to the scene to have failed a purity test, but I am sure it will come.
I think you and I agree that the wonky full-detail policies of serious progressive politicians are pocketbook issues. My position isn’t about the wonks, though, it’s that most online people who consider themselves progressives are terrible ambassadors for the movement.
Ah. Yeah, it sounds like you need to calibrate your tankie-detector. Have a look around instances like .ml or hexbear to see what I’m talking about.
Or for a more contained view, check out the community meanwhileongrad which I think is on your instance, where they post screenshots of the crazy shit people say on lemmygrad
Or you could use the user tag feature many lemmy clients have. Just long press a username and it should be in the menu. You can color code it and give them fun labels so you know who to avoid.
It’s certainly not everyone on the threadiverse, but it is a known problem. Basically disingenuous and combative users arguing in bad faith and being unnecessarily hostile. Make good use of the block button too.
Those users don’t call themselves progressives though, they usually identify as ML (marxist-leninist) or something similar. And they fucking hate us progressives. They call us neolibs 🙄
They’re just mad because they were rooting for maga to accelerate the downfall of western society, and they’re upset that progressives are out to prove that the system can actually work for the working class.
Most of the time they’re not even worth engaging with. Occasionally you’ll meet a rational .ml user who just happened to choose that instance for whatever reason, but they certainly seem to be the exception rather than the rule
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^
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 what’s really happening makes any move lacking in reason and material evidence and arguments that are based in reality. It’s 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 don’t know anything about proposed alternative speakers, but I have seen people suggest that El-Sayed be the speaker… He’s my kind of guy. He punches back speaks clearly and seems to be the kind of person that I’m 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 I’ll give him that. But you’re absolutely right about all the other things that are terrible about him. Can we get someone who’s not terrible who can actually maneuver?
I don’t know about you but this is the first time I’ve heard about this Van Hollen character. Maybe I don’t follow inside baseball enough, and I certainly wouldn’t argue that we should keep Chuck because we know who he is. But I also don’t think just going in blind on some one. We don’t really know much about make sense either.
Amusing that you think I’m 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. It’s not for beginners, and I never said it was.
And I also note that you have entirely ignored – again – 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:
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 wasn’t.
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 – 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 can’t 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 can’t 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 I’m probably three times older than you (at minimum), and it doesn’t take much to understand the basics of what a Senate Majority Leader does. But you don’t 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.
what a load of complete rubbish.
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.
deleted by creator
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.
I won’t 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 “hope and change”.
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 2028…
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 anyone’s quality of life), etc.
If progressive agendas are about pocketbook issues, the majority of lemmy enthusiastics are terrible ambassadors for it.
I’ve certainly never seen that. I’ve only seen people be shown the science around it and still double down on transphobic rants against it that don’t reflect the science.
The transphobes ready to do pile-on rants given the smallest openings is part of what drives the denial of science uncertainty on the pro-trans side: any admission there is more to learn is, unfortunately, not taken as nuance but instead used to springboard unfounded attacks.
The unfairness of the situation doesn’t make the science actually settled, though. For example, even a pro-trans site (https://www.them.us/answers-and-advice/health/puberty-blockers-bone-density) defense of puberty blockers dropping bone density is that
The reduced bone density in recently transitioned teens is not a risk for them in their youth or middle age. The risk is that the only partially recovered density sets them up for higher rates of osteoporosis and debilitating bone fractures in their 60s and up. Definitive answers won’t be available - leaving the science unsettled - until they reach their 60s several decades from now.
Like I said, I’ve never seen a denial of science from trans people. I’ve ready many journals and studies, and they all seem to support the understanding that transitioning changes our physical abilities. Trans women often score around the same, sometimes higher, sometimes lower with other cis women in a range of variables - but overall comparable. We certainly need more studies into things such as timelines for HRT changes as studies cut-off after 3 years, or the effects of Progesterone - but the science of the sports debate is much clearer.
As for the puberty blocker/bone density thing he easy solution is to allow children to access HRT and go through the correct puberty. Puberty blockers largely exist as a political compromise with cis people over the ownership of our bodies.
Also them.us (pinknews, and one other that escape me) are considered to be a bit transphobic out of most queer media.
are you doing a bit, or did you sign up for the wrong instance?
I wanted a smaller instance, but one with stable presence likely to be durable, and was impressed with the instance governing system. The average instance member also tends IMO to be more thoughtful and more likely to help me learn and make me think even if I disagree with their position. I am appreciative to be here as long as the flotilla will have me!
Sounds like you’re getting tunnel vision while examining the lunatic fringe under a microscope and then generalizing that as the entirety of progressivism.
It’s really just a caricature though, because the same edge lords that you’re describing would actually refer to most progressives as some variety of “neoliberal,” “shitlib,” or even “fascist.”
They’re not serious, and the left would be better off without them. In fact I think most of them are plants.
But in case you’re not just being disingenuous and you’re actually curious about progressivism, then try reading about the policies advocated for by people like Bernie Sanders, AOC, Abdul El-Sayed, etc…
And then if you tell me with a straight face that those aren’t pocketbook issues, I won’t believe you
Unfortunately the lunatic fringe is loud. The most numerous comments I read on lemmy about AOC call her a sellout for the compromises she makes to get things done for her constituents. The most numerous comments I read about Bernie are conspiracy theories about his primary loss to Hillary Clinton. El-Sayed is too new to the scene to have failed a purity test, but I am sure it will come.
I think you and I agree that the wonky full-detail policies of serious progressive politicians are pocketbook issues. My position isn’t about the wonks, though, it’s that most online people who consider themselves progressives are terrible ambassadors for the movement.
Ah. Yeah, it sounds like you need to calibrate your tankie-detector. Have a look around instances like .ml or hexbear to see what I’m talking about.
Or for a more contained view, check out the community meanwhileongrad which I think is on your instance, where they post screenshots of the crazy shit people say on lemmygrad
Or you could use the user tag feature many lemmy clients have. Just long press a username and it should be in the menu. You can color code it and give them fun labels so you know who to avoid.
It’s certainly not everyone on the threadiverse, but it is a known problem. Basically disingenuous and combative users arguing in bad faith and being unnecessarily hostile. Make good use of the block button too.
Those users don’t call themselves progressives though, they usually identify as ML (marxist-leninist) or something similar. And they fucking hate us progressives. They call us neolibs 🙄
They’re just mad because they were rooting for maga to accelerate the downfall of western society, and they’re upset that progressives are out to prove that the system can actually work for the working class.
Most of the time they’re not even worth engaging with. Occasionally you’ll meet a rational .ml user who just happened to choose that instance for whatever reason, but they certainly seem to be the exception rather than the rule