The progressive group Indivisible called for Democratic lawmakers on Wednesday to replace Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) as Democratic leader after the party secured control of both chambers of Congress in Tuesday’s midterm elections.

“Yesterday, voters made it very clear that they want a new generation of Democratic fighters,” the group wrote in a social media post. “We need a leader in the Senate who is capable of leading that fight. It’s time for Senate Democrats to choose new leadership.”

The group cited the Democratic leader’s faltering approval ratings in its Wednesday statement. An NBC News poll conducted at the end of October found only 13 percent of registered voters viewed Schumer’s leadership positively.

“The American people did not elect Democrats by historic margins just to bend the knee and go back to business as usual,” Indivisible said in its statement. “Senate Democrats need to listen to the voters and turn the page on status quo politics.”

The paid opposition running the Democrats will not falter in their supporting of their Republican donors' causes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 11 points 2 days ago (26 children)

This is another thing a lot of people here are ignoring.

Not every Dem is a Progressive. Obama had a super majority and it took him two years to pass the ACA, a bill he called 'a starter house.'

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 days ago (25 children)

    Yes, and a lot of the widely celebrated wins in red states are still very conservative Dems. They didn't run on progressive ideas and will not support any of it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 days ago (24 children)

    Thank you!

    The thing I want people to remember is that we've got the same number of Progressives today that we had in 2024. What won the election was people who voted for Trump three times finally getting sick of him.

    Those folks want lower gas prices, not impeachment.

    Let him sit in the White House for two years and then let the state courts have at him.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (8 children)

    "those folks want lower gas prices"

    Who gives a fuck what pedophile supporting Nazis want? Fuck them and anyone in power in their party needs to be in our prison or the Hague.

    Who are you? Why on earth would you sit here and try to treat these sociopathic and sadistic monsters who cheered for little girls to be blown up, and immigrants to be put in concetration camps and trafficked all over the world as "folks who want lower gas prices"?

    We have to remove every conservative from the democratic party and that includes neoliberals. Capitalism breaks brains I guess and as long as their 401k is good, they will just goose-step all over the world and allow whatever to go on I guess

    We have way more progressives now as evidenced by DSA wins

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

    I understand where you're coming from, by under current conditions, with the American people being reactionary, it's impossible for the left to hold power on its own. That means the only ways of achieving power are to work with shitty people or to convince formerly shitty people to stop being shitty.

    What is the path to victory, if we isolate ourselves from the average person?

    We can (and must) begin to build socialism, not with abstract human material, or with human material specially prepared by us, but with the human material bequeathed to us by capitalism. True, that is no easy matter, but no other approach to this task is serious enough to warrant discussion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    I largely agree with you on this, but there are limits to "shitty people". Religious extremists and Nazis have an entire philosophy and desire to destroy and/or control everyone else. They feel joy when people they don't like are in pain. They cannot be dealt with any other way than banishment or destruction (and banishment just means we will deal with them later)

    With that being said, maybe some of the neoliberals will change, but they are already working hard to appease the elements of the extreme right rather than the left as we speak

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    I agree with that. There's definitely limits and alliances aren't always beneficial. I'm just saying that if someone is prepared to help end the war in Iran because of gas prices, ideally they'd have a more humanitarian motivation, and we can call them out for it, sure, and not fully trust them, of course, but we don't need to be turning away willing hands. And the same goes for the neoliberals. Neither group reliably supports our goals, but on the occasions that they do, cool. There's a line to walk, I guess.

    And it's worth noting that not every Trump voter is a Nazi (at least not an ideologically committed one), some are just politically disengaged or gullible or they were just more aware of the Democrats' flaws without seeing the Republicans'. There are certainly some that are ideologically committed and yeah fuck them, we don't need, like, Tucker Carlson or JD Vance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (3 children)

    Nazis vote.

    Votes win elections.

    There are people who voted for Obama twice, and then voted for Trump three times.

    You want to win elections, listen to them. You don't have to pander to them, but you have to deal with reality.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    Nah. I won't deal with pedophilic Nazi supporters ever.

    "There are people who voted for Obama twice, and then voted for Trump three times."

    I don't care about whatever stupid people these are. To have voted for Obama twice and to switch to Trump, shows you don't have values, don't have any political or economic knowledge, and generally can't form a cohesive thought because there wasn't a single thing spoken from that orange fuck's mouth that sounded good to single normal person.

    It shows that they don't even have an ideology or political stance, they are JUST cultists looking for a leader. Those kind of people don't need to be part of our party, they offer nothing

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (13 children)

    The thing I want people to remember is that we've got the same number of Progressives today that we had in 2024.

    Except that, you know, all the DSA members who were literally just elected for the first time?

    Quick Google search tells me that DSA is poised to win 105 seats, functionally quadrupling their presence in Congress.

    So yeah dude, totally the exact same number of progressives as 2024 🙄

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago (12 children)

    And?

    Obama won two elections in a row, and then Trump came in.

    If you think everyone who voted for a DSA candidate last night is now a Progressive you're wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (11 children)

    Obama was like the most center-right, milquetoast Democrat we ever elected

    If you think everyone who voted for a DSA candidate last night is now a Progressive you're wrong.

    DSA is an inherently progressing platform, so unless they're outright lying about their beliefs, then yes they are all progressives.

    That's how words work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (10 children)

    so unless they’re outright lying about their beliefs, then yes they are all progressives.

    Show me exactly where voting requires 'belief.'

    Plenty of people voted for Obama twice and Trump three times.

    Most people vote their wallets.

    You sound a lot like Mrs. Clinton. She assumed that people wouldn't vote for a deplorable candidate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (9 children)

    So DSA doesn't vet their candidates? Is that the claim here? I'm honestly confused as to what your point here is supposed to be (and I suspect you may be as well)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (8 children)

    Candidates =/= voters.

    Is that simple enough for you?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (7 children)

    We're talking about DSA people who already won their respective elections. Like you get that right? They were already elected, so it doesn't really matter which voters are literal socialists, and which are just "fellow travelers" who decided to vote for a DSA candidate.

    But like, you get that we're talking about DSA candidates that have already won, right? Hillary Clinton didn't win, so how does that situation compare in any way?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (6 children)

    Let me put it this way.

    Show me the exact words you read that made you think I was talking about DSA candidates and not the voters.

    Because I've been talking about the voters the whole time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago* (5 children)

    Cool. As long as it means you "won" which is clearly all that matters to you.

    So despite DSA quadrupling their presence in Congress, you can state with undue certainty that the number of progressive voters has remained the same. Uh huh. Right.

    Normally, I'd be curious about your methodology there, but I already know there is none so don't bother.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (4 children)

    Show me the exact words you read that made you think I was talking about DSA candidates and not the voters.

    I won this argument the same way the DSA won on Tuesday.

    The opposition was completely confused.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children)

    For what?

    I wrote about one thing. You completely misunderstood, then doubled down.

    Now you're being sarcastic and acting like I'm the bad guy.

    You're beating your head against a brick wall and trying to make me feel guilty.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

    Well Vance would presumably give Iran whatever it wants to open the strait. He could also roll back Trump's suicidal treasury policies and tariffs.

    So they do want impeachment. If all they want is just cheap gas that would do it.

  • source
  • parent