this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2026
135 points (97.9% liked)

politics

29165 readers
3369 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
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
Theonetheycall1845@lemmy.world
JuBe@lemmy.world
Lasherz12@lemmy.world
135
Schumer faces discontent from Democrats running for the Senate (thehill.com)
submitted 1 day ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
15 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Dissatisfaction is emerging with Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) among Democrats running for Senate seats in this year’s elections.

The question of backing Schumer as Democratic leader has become a new litmus test, with several candidates — even in purple and red states — pushing for a changing of the guard.

“I’ve already said that I will not support Chuck Schumer as leader in the Senate, and I’m the only person on this stage that has said so,” Illinois Senate Democratic nominee Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton (D) said during a January debate before her primary victory earlier this month.

Though Schumer is unlikely to face any real threat to his leadership post after November, the discontent has spotlighted the party’s lingering battle over its direction and generational change.

top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] aramis87@fedia.io 35 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Remember the last shutdown, when we had the Republicans over a barrel and almost every Democrat in the nation was like, "Finally! This is the line and we're not backing down!" - and then Schumer backed down in return for a measly promise that Democratic issues would be 'considered' [completely ignored] the next month?

He's 75, he thinks the government still works like it used to (and actually still works, lol), and we desperately need a change of leadership away from the Schumer's and the Pelosi's.

[–] bibbasa@piefed.social 13 points 1 day ago

and before that, chickened out of a shutdown before that horrendous bill was passed in the first place.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

There were some other parts to that

[–] Akh@lemmy.world 51 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The senator from Israel is not representative of the US - got it

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

He's not a senator. He's a traitor. Only slightly better than the nazi party. Arguably worse as he prevents meaningful opposition to the nazi coup.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 day ago

How is this level of ridiculous hyperbole helpful in any way?

[–] SippyCup@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well, he represents that imaginary Republican couple from Kansas pretty well.

[–] tmyakal 9 points 1 day ago

Hey, the Baileys are from Long Island, not Kansas!

No, but seriously, fuck this dude.

[–] Washedupcynic@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago

We delivered more security assistance to Israel, our ally, under my leadership than ever, ever before. We will keep doing that… I have many jobs as leader & one is to fight for aid to Israel. Remember, he isn't fighting for NYers, or for Americans, he's fighting for Israel.

[–] notwhoyouthink@lemmy.zip 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Removing Schumer + the rest of the center-right dems can be a very successful message to campaign on for any and all progressive candidates. I’d personally vote for anyone who promises to make this happen.

As long as we are stuck with a two party system, we need to overhaul the Democratic Party into the party that actually represents progressive voters, and that actually creates real change instead of just being ‘not Republican’. Essentially, we need to hijack the party with the name recognition it already has and shape it into something that we can be proud of, that we’ll fight like hell to keep, and that actually lives up to its name. The time has long come for us to become as organized, radical, and frightening as the right pretends we are.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago

I don't think the democrats ever reckoned with the fact that a lot of Bernie Sanders supporters went for Trump once Hillary Clinton became the democratic nominee.

There's still a very powerful anti-establishment sentiment in the US. Someone like Chuck Schumer (just like Hillary Clinton) is the core of "establishment" politics. Schumer's been in politics for something like 50 years. You're never going to convince people that things are going to change when he's in a position of power.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'd like to believe that Schumer is a wily old fox who doesn't understand the current moment, but was really good with rules and procedures in the old way of doing things.

But, my guess is that he just has some important contacts with ultra rich people who he can get to donate to the democrats in exchange for favours they'll call in later.

[–] beelzebum@lemmy.world 0 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

So, just talking out of your ass?

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

Schumer only got his current spot because they vote on leadership a week or two before the DNC votes on chair...

So when Schumer followed the neoliberal playbook of threatening to cut off funds to home states of anyone that didn't vote for him, it was a valid threat.

A week later, it became toothless because there isn't a neoliberal shill running the DNC anymore.

That's why so many Dem politicians are willing to say Schumer (and Jeffries) need replaced even if they voted for them a year ago.

The DNC changed the math.

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago

Is there anywhere I can place a bet on him not leaving office and also winning his seat back?

I'd put a couple hundred down on that.