this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2026
727 points (99.2% liked)

politics

28244 readers
1725 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Well sounds like the Democratic leadership to aggressively court disgruntled voters and listening and addressing their concerns is off to a great start with this.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Asafum@lemmy.world 146 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Guys, you just don't understand. His job, as he stated, is "to fight like hell for Israel." This other stuff is just peanuts for him.

[–] tmyakal 67 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Not just Israel. He's also here for the Baileys!

From Wikipedia:

Schumer has long claimed that his political decisions are guided by an imaginary middle-class couple, Joe and Eileen Bailey (initially O'Reilly), swing voters living in the Long Island suburb of Massapequa

[–] Rekhyt@lemmy.world 68 points 1 week ago

Specifically an imaginary couple who voted for Trump twice. His guiding imaginary couple are Republicans.

[–] Manjushri@piefed.social 55 points 1 week ago

If you haven't seen it, here is a link to Jon Oliver's piece about Schumer and the Bailey's and how the imaginary swing voters he bases his policy decisions on are really Republicans.

[–] Asafum@lemmy.world 30 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Fuck those people. I'm from long island, I know people from Massapequa. They probably love ICE.

[–] whotookkarl@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 week ago

So does Schumer

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

Even better, Trump takes the focus off Gaza, that's a big win for Schumer.

[–] littlewonder@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Maybe he needs to go be a politician in Israel then because I'd prefer that he "fight like hell" for the US at the moment.

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Maybe he should join the Knesset if he cares more for Israel than the US.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.wtf 107 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I used to think he was merely useless, now I think he's a collaborator.

[–] pigup@lemmy.world 35 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 week ago

I used to, but I still do.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 80 points 1 week ago (77 children)

The DNC is controlled opposition and the fact that centrists are in denial about it puts all of us in great peril.

load more comments (77 replies)
[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 60 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Yeah this clown and like half the Dem establishment needs to go. Maybe more than half. I'm not one for the "both parties are the same" bullshit, but between the enablements and the not listening to constituents, it is clear that many of these people are incapable of performing the duties for which they were elected.

[–] Nastybutler@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

Their duty is to Israel first, America second. We need to primary any Dem who takes AIPAC, or other Zionist groups, money.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Suavevillain@lemmy.world 47 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Chuck is a big reason in the rise of Trumpism. He has been weak and only cares about Israel.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

How sad you all assume he's not corrupt and is just taking in big $.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 38 points 1 week ago

He doesn’t work for the American people he works for Israel

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 38 points 1 week ago (2 children)

House Democrats found themselves in the familiar position this week of seething at Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) for negotiating a deal with Republicans to keep the government funded.

Why it matters: While his caucus remains behind him, Schumer is becoming persona non grata for much of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.

"I'm gonna continue to tell you that Schumer needs to get the hell out over and over and over until he does," Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) told Axios. "He continues to demonstrate to us that he can't meet the moment," she added. Another House Democrat, speaking on the condition of anonymity to offer insights into private conversations among lawmakers, told Axios: "The main feeling among members is a lack of trust in his strength and ability to strike a hard bargain." State of play: The House voted Tuesday to pass an appropriations package that funds the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Labor, Housing and Urban Development, State and Transportation until September.

It also keeps the Department of Homeland Security funded at 2025 levels until Feb. 13, which is meant to give Senate Democrats and the White House enough time to hash out a final deal on ICE and Customs and Border Protection reforms. But while Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) have said they won't accept anything short of reforms of those agencies, their GOP counterparts have cast doubt on the prospect of a quick deal. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) went so far as to tell reporters that a deal by Feb. 13 was an "impossibility," floating a year-long stopgap funding bill to keep DHS open. What they're saying: Jeffries has essentially threatened to allow a DHS shutdown if his demands aren't met, saying in a statement Tuesday, "Absent bold and meaningful change, there is no credible path forward with respect to the Department of Homeland Security funding bill next week."

But Schumer, asked if he would make the same ultimatum at a press conference with Jeffries on Wednesday, told reporters, "I'm just going to say we're sending them a proposal and we await their response." Senate Democrats — unlike their House counterparts — have the ability to block a DHS funding bill because it takes a 60-vote majority to pass it in the upper chamber. What we're hearing: Some Democrats, worried that the threat of a DHS shutdown is not enough to force Republicans to the table, feel Schumer gave up the party's best leverage by cutting a deal to reopen the rest of the government.

"Every time that we are winning, we seem to somehow sabotage [it]," Ramirez fumed, noting that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has already ruled out several Democratic demands.

Said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.): "Personally I was of the opinion ... that, 'What are we going to get in 10 days that we didn't get?'" A second House Democrat who spoke on the condition of anonymity told Axios that "all those spending bills, that is the most leverage," and that "many folks in the [House] Democratic caucus wish that we had more confidence in Schumer's ability to navigate a good, tough deal." Yes, but: Some progressive House Democrats are still confident that the DHS bill is enough leverage to secure some concessions.

"I don't think Republicans want a DHS shutdown," Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) told Axios. She added: "If Donald Trump wants to ... issue the State of the Union with the entire Department of Homeland Security shut down, I think that is a terrible indictment of his leadership. And I do think they care." Jayapal and Rep. Chuy García (D-Ill.) both argued that public opinion against ICE is another piece of leverage for Democrats, with García telling Axios: "They 'ought to be worried how their policies are faring with the American people." The bottom line: "It could be a huge failure" for Senate Democrats, Ocasio-Cortez says, if they fail to secure the reforms the party are demanding.

"The stakes are quite high."

[–] hector@lemmy.today 16 points 1 week ago

Massey, the Republican on the outs, told the dems they have to actually hold out for something concrete.

Jesus christ, maybe massey should be appointed to lead. How are there no challenges to democratic leadership? Not now, not, ever? What is wrong with the party? What is wrong with us for accepting this?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lemmylump@lemmy.world 34 points 1 week ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Jaysyn@lemmy.world 33 points 1 week ago

Duh. Schumer works for Israel, not the USA.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 30 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Every one of the fucking rotating villains needs to go. You vote for any of that shit, you're out.

[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Boomers have overstayed their welcome.

[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 14 points 1 week ago

That's true but don't fool yourself. There are younger dirty politicians waiting to replace them if we aren't careful, and probably in some places even if we are.

Yeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh!

[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (3 children)

This isn’t a generational issue, this is all out class warfare.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] EtAl@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 1 week ago (7 children)

I used to think it was Russia that had infiltrated US politics. I mean it did, but Israel got there first.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 week ago

Israel, Russia, Trendy Aqua, whatever. Ultimately the USA has failed to maintain its obligations to civil society, allowing those who operate the mechanisms of power and policy to be susceptible to such exploitation. Classic blunder.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

Schumer is hand-in-hand with the republicans. What they can’t win, he loses for the democrats.

[–] tmyakal 19 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I have held my nose and voted for this rat-fuck in every election of my adult life. I keep hoping someone who actually cares about New Yorkers will primary him.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

AOC polls way better than Schumer among all registered voters in New York (yes, including Republicans). She's going to primary him in 2028.

Wish it could be sooner, but her success can leverage off Mamdani's progress, should all go well...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 18 points 1 week ago

It's time for the MAGA comedy act of Schmuck & Jeffries to get the hook, and get dragged off stage.

[–] WanderWisley@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Get the fuck out chuck and move to Israel you will be accepted there.

load more comments
view more: next ›