Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer is facing a potentially serious challenge to his hold on power as momentum builds behind Chris Van Hollen, with the Maryland senator now reportedly open to a run for majority leader.

A movement to draft Van Hollen to challenge Schumer is gaining steam, according to Politico Playbook, which reported Monday that two people close to the effort said it was underway.

A person familiar with Van Hollen’s thinking told the outlet that the senator has “received an outpouring of calls and is now in active listening mode.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 10 points 19 hours ago (18 children)

I, for one, would never vote Democrat again. If they leave the masked goons hunting us in the street, if they continue to enable genocide, any of the centrist bullshit currently being floated around, they are fucking dead to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 18 hours ago (1 child)

    The reality of the US political system is that the only way to move left in America is via the Primaries. Until there's another Tea Party to break up the right vote, the only way to keep the status quo or move the window is to primary in DSA candidates and break the hold of the apparatchik in the Democrat establishment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Yes - but I'll also add that the left can be much more effective in electoral power by refusing the "Vote Blue No Matter Who" nonsense. Openly and proudly state that we can and will make the Democrats lose power if they cross us.

    Not only is this what the right wing of the GOP does (successfully), it's what the right wing of the Democratic Party does, and how they've held power for 40 years.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 19 hours ago (4 children)
  • [–] 26 points 19 hours ago (1 child)

    A lot of folks feel like OP.

    The dems won this time, but the folks who voted for them are in essence holding a gun to their heads: they'd better get their act together and deliver, or else.

    The minute the dems step out of line, the voters will turn on them faster than you can say "Traitors... Hold my beer" and vote MAGA en mass as a violent epidermic reaction. And keeping fucking Schumer and fucking Jeffries around would be the first sign of treason.

    Nobody, NOBODY likes the dems. The only reason they won is because people like lying demented orange billionaire grafter pedophiles even less.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 19 hours ago (5 children)

    MAGA thanks you for your vote. Socialist > DSA > Dems > Reps

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (4 children)

    So stick with the status quo centrists because thats such a winning thing, is what you are saying eh habitualcynic.
    So bold. Because centrism was winning so hard, right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

    Vote for progressive candidates in the Dem primary. Help them win, and you don't have to vote for centrist fucks. But if the progressives doesn't win, vote the dem anyway because it's less damaging.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

    Precisely. They either don’t understand strategy or they are Russian trolls supporting the fascists.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • You've been running that strategy for 40 years.

    It doesn't work.

    The reason is easy enough to understand, once you realize that in a 2-party system, the most marginal voter determines policy.

    So when they take your advice, the left becomes captive, and suddenly has no leverage over any politician. Meanwhile, the mythical moderate Republican (all 20 of them) becomes the battleground for the election.

    This, of course, ignores the effect that this centrist nonsense has on turnout, as shown in 2024, but since non-votes aren't counted, it doesn't enter the electoral math. Which is why you saw Harris swing to the right with Liz Cheney. How'd that work out?

    So vote in the Democratic primaries. And if you lose, vote 3rd party to register your disgust.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

    The truth is Democrats aren't going to do shit to "save democracy," and anyone who thinks or thought they were is delusional.

    Notice, the Democrats never ran on how exactly they were going to save democracy. The reason they didn't is that saving democracy is incredibly unpopular. If you actually want to save democracy, you have to pass very unpopular laws.

    Mainly, you need to strip the presidency of all the emergency powers Congress has given it over the years, dismantle the post-9/11 security and surveillance state, and disband ICE.

    Here is the problem. Doing any of these things will literally get Americans killed. If you dismantle the unconstitutional mass spying apparatus, inevitably, eventually, there's going to be some terrorist attack that occurs that that spying could have prevented. If you disband ICE, inevitably some person who happens to be an illegal immigrant is going to kill some white woman, and it will be found out that ICE would have deported them before it happened.

    In these cases, I would argue that the deaths are worth it. I am absolutely willing to trade some safety for freedom. Freedom is worth fighting for; it's worth dying for. It's worth seeing innocent people die for it.

    That's the core problem. The tools of a dictator are also the tools of ordinary law enforcement. If you strip away the dictator's toolkit, you also disempower law enforcement, which means some otherwise preventable crimes will happen. And your political opposition can latch onto those few rare cases and crucify you with them.

    This is why Democrats cannot save democracy. Ultimately, they are complete cowards. Saving democracy requires courage and conviction. It requires a politician to look the voters dead in the eyes and say, "some of your children are going to die because of this bill I am proposing, and that is an acceptable loss I am willing to pay to ensure our children get to live in a democracy."

    I've never seen a Democrat running on that kind of message. But that's what it would take to actually save democracy. And this is why it will not be done.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 hours ago

    The tools of a dictator are also the tools of ordinary law enforcement.

    Oppressive measures are seldom effective at their stated purposes: people are not safer in totalitarian states than they are in those with human rights. They're just unsafe for different reasons. Being at the mercy of a well-resourced mob of armed goons with official backing is not better than being preyed on by a number of small, disorganised non-state groups.

    Look at arming police in the US. The end result is thousands of people per year being killed or maimed by those police. And yet crime rates are no lower than in countries where the police are less homicidal.

    Similarly, pervasive surveillance captures a vast volume of largely irrelevant information, leading to the use of automated threat detection systems that invariably generate false positives that cause innocent people's lives to be ruined. Yet there is no protection from threats from state actors and their collaborators who act with impunity.

    “some of your children are going to die because of this bill I am proposing, and that is an acceptable loss I am willing to pay to ensure our children get to live in a democracy.”

    It's a false tradeoff. Adoption of increasingly authoritarian measures is not a free lunch and has the potential to kill even more children for other reasons. The costs of operating a surveillance society, with all its IT, weapons and snitches, have to be paid somehow. Typically that money comes from dismantling services that actually protect people's lives and health. They're sure as shit not going to take it from the military or the police.

  • source
  • parent