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.”

all 96 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 202 points 19 hours ago (28 children)

Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries need to go. If they remains, an awful lot of people who voted democrat will feel stabbed in the back - and with good reason.

  • source
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 19 hours ago (5 children)

    The first and biggest hurdle is that you need people who are not only able but willing to do the job. Not many people want it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 18 hours ago* (2 children)

    That, to me, is the bar. If someone wants to lead, wants power, wants to be famous etc, they are unqualified. Because it means they really did not understand the job.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 18 hours ago

    Our politicians are chosen to be weak, the corporos fear the left, somehow not so much the right, despite history, preferring the total ruin of dictatorship and ultimate military rule to moderate reform. Such as it's always been. From the late roman republic, to germany with the nazis, to now.

    Plenty of people want the job, of senator, but any white populist is simply not welcome and will be character assassinated if not killed in the cradle, because they can challenge the leadership, where the inner city minority populists cannot.

    That's the fucking truth.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 hours ago

    That and the very serious consequences of challenging and failing. Schumer is a neoliberal conservative. They are as petty and vindictive as any other conservative. Failing can mean no committee positions or draft cosigners until they are gone.

    Conservatives like Schumer are pure evil, even when they have a D next to their name. The risk sounds pretty intimidating. You have to know you have the votes before committing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 18 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
  • [–] 13 points 17 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 18 hours ago (4 children)
  • [–] 26 points 18 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 18 hours ago (5 children)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 11 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 16 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
  • [–] 4 points 15 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
  • [–] -2 points 10 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 2 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
  • [–] -1 points 1 hour ago (1 child)

    the amount of lies being spread about these heroes is quite phenomenal

    the old commie/russia/islamist propaganda machine is really keen to ice these capable politicians

    shame you guy don't matter any more and these 2 are a shoo-in lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 121 points 18 hours ago (5 children)

    How is Schuner not considered a generational failure after 2024?

    They lost a supermajority to a convicted felon, adjudicated rapist, and the star of the Epstein files.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 17 hours ago* (4 children)

    Do you remember the 2016 DNC convention shenanigans?

    Pepperidge Farms remembers.

    The committee holds all the power in there, and the DNC is about as from "Democratic" as you could find. Fuck the super-delegate system, etc. etc. etc.

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

    The current DNC Chair supported progressive candidates.

    The DNC isn't the same DNC is was in 2016. Or 2020. Or 2024.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 13 hours ago*

    The current DNC chair supports taking bribes donations from “good billionaires”, it’s the same DNC as always but with a fresh vaneer of progressive ideals.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 15 hours ago

    FUCK CHUCK

    GET REAMED, HAKEEM

  • source
  • [–] 50 points 19 hours ago (14 children)

    An old ham sandwich has more support than Schumer, pick literally any other senator

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 58 points 19 hours ago (13 children)

    The monkey’s paw curls: Fetterman is now the Senate Majority Leader.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 19 hours ago (11 children)

    Monkey's paw turns into a fist: Mitch McConnell remains Senate Majority Leader

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

    Hey if DSA can pick the aide who tells him which way to vote, still better than Schumer

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

    Mitch has been completely silent on this issue, so you may be right

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 18 hours ago* (2 children)

    Mitch's term ends next year, so he won't be eligible. Darn! Also, he's not Senate Majority Leader even now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 17 hours ago (1 child)

    I hadn't seen him outside of like a photo after his "re-appearence" or whatever. My spouse showed me a video short of him yesterday with a journalist asking him what his thoughts are about the Republicans losing so many seats and how it will effect Trumps actions in the upcoming years. Mitch couldn't nod, shake his head, or open his mouth. I don't think he could even comprehend someone was asking him a question or where he was.

    People are essentially pushing around a meat sack to subvert the Republic all the while abusing the hell out of this elderly person.

    I would think his constituents would be demanding to know who is acting as their rep, because it isn't Mitch, and they weren't elected.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 17 hours ago

    I'm assuming they're meat sacking him around to keep the Democrat governor of Kentucky from nominating a replacement. Pointless, since a Republican will be taking his seat next term and they lost their majority anyway!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

    Future in doubt? The man is 75. Going home and retiring on your (dubiously-gotten) riches is the American dream. Just do that. That’s not future in doubt. That’s success coming to fruition. Fuck this staying in power until you’re literally in a coffin.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 18 hours ago

    Good. Van Hollen for senate majority leader! 2027 call your reps and senators. I’ve called mine!

  • source
  • [–] 26 points 18 hours ago

    El Sayed said Van Hollen is eying the presidency, we need him for this first though, this would be an excellent springboard for that.

    Schumer and Jeffries have to go. They failed.

  • source
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 11 points 13 hours ago

    I hear the Bailey's are pushing for Van Hollen.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 15 hours ago (1 child)

    Based on everything coming out it seems Hakeem has massive support in the caucus. So much so that no one even wants to give the idea that they don’t support him.

    Schumer on the other hand sounds like his support isn’t as wide spread.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 15 points 16 hours ago

    One down, Hakeem to go.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 8 hours ago

    Chuck Schumer or the senator who tried to enter CECOT in El Salvador.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 18 hours ago

    Bye Felicia and good riddance. Take your old crusty ass back to the genocidal, child trafficking colony of Israel

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 18 hours ago

    Out Out Damned Spot

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

    How do we go about finding contact info for our Democratic Senators-elect? I looked for mine and couldn't find much beyond his campaign website.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 16 hours ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 16 hours ago (1 child)

    My rep is a Trumptard and was reelected. Our junior senator-elect is a Democrat. I looked for his info on the Senate's website and it only shows the two current senators.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 16 hours ago

    Your senator elect probably has a campaign website, that will have their current best contact (which may not be much at the moment).

    If they were previously a state representative you might have luck looking up their contact information there.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (2 children)

    I would recommend contacting your house representative which you can find here: https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative

    Also contact your state senators. If any of these state officers changed from the 2026 election, contact both the current and senator/representative elects who will be taking office in January.

    Let each of them know that you want Schumer and Jeffries gone and you want for the Trump administration: justice, investigations, and the immediate release of the Epstein files.

    Edit: note that someone downvoted this. https://lemvotes.org/comment/lemmy.world/comment/26782113

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 17 hours ago (1 child)

    I can 100% see Martin advocating for him as well.

    Are there probably better Senate Majority Leaders? I think so. But he's far more progressive than Schumer.

    You know, I've always kind of wondered - does the DNC chair actually weigh in on it?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 2 hours ago

    Glad to hear Van Hollen's changed his mind. There was no one running in opposition to Schumer. Plus he's got a progressive streak.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 17 hours ago
    [–] 12 points 11 hours ago (1 child)

    As long as the leadership appointment process is undemocratic, the party’s choice will be unacceptable. The leadership must be purged, the rules of the party election process must be thrown out and revised. This is the only way to stop the political pendulum from swinging back and forth between the two parties.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 hours ago

    I just can't see that happening without either serious deception or a serious threat from a 3rd party. The neoliberals have already proven they don't give a shit about vote splitting and will happily lose to fascists rather than accept progressives, so I don't think any 3rd party could ever be enough of a threat. That leaves only trickery and deception (or maybe a well timed bus wreck).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 hour ago (1 child)

    In all fairness, Chuck has had his day in the Sun and it's time to make way for the next person.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 8 hours ago (1 child)

    That's good news! Timothy Snyder has just done a whole series of talks with existing and newly elected congresspeople that are really good, called Now We Act. He's asking all the right questions and pointing out that not only do the people want accountability, affordability depends on accountability and they are intertwined.

    Here's his interview with Chris Van Hollen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kvYxsRiJmE Mark Kelly's is also good. I've just watched a few so far but I'm starting to feel a sense of hope watching this series.

    So I'm really glad to hear that Van Hollen may come around and be willing to do it, after saying he wasn't considering it earlier. Not only would he be good at the job, but hey it's the ones who are reluctant that make the best leaders since they're not doing it out of ambition but out of a sense of duty.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 hours ago (3 children)

    I think I would rather it be someone like AOC.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 15 hours ago (7 children)

    Hmm seems they are pushing a Zionist who balls out on j street contributions. Not good enough.

    Too much Israel for American politics. It’s a political cancer that needs to be weeded out.

    Imagine if Muslim elected officials said their goal was to empower Iraq. They would be deported. The ridiculous double standard needs to end. These Zionists are traitors to the United States.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 15 hours ago* (4 children)
  • [–] 2 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

    230k from Israeli pac j street. J street are self proclaimed “liberal Zionists”

    So let’s just go back to status quo from 2015? Absolutely not.

    There is an active effort by Israelis online to quietly pivot Americans to support other pro Israel pacs. They know the aipac name is compromised.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/Jewish/comments/1dcckh1/thoughts_on_jstreet/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 14 hours ago* (2 children)

    You haven't addressed Van Hollen in particular or the source I posted which if even slightly reliable, would contradict your claim about Van Hollen. Why would the Zionists themselves have wasted their time writing up how against them Van Hollen is to them, if he's in fact one of them?

    If you don't respond to what I'm asking, I'll have to assume you are a bot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 14 hours ago*

    Track aipac says he got 230k from Israeli donors, track j street on twitter might have more information. I don’t have a twitter so I can’t dig there. I disagree with track aipac saying there are commendable Israeli pacs. That’s just controlled opposition nonsense.

    Again if Abdul was getting money from an Arab state saying empowering them is his job Americans would have pitchforks out.

    Foreign countries should not be allowed to manipulate any elected officials.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [+] 0 points 16 hours ago