Someone get ahold of the Baileys
Zionists have a long history of occupation of Democratic seats that should have gone to other people… It goes back to the civil rights movement where these groups were aligned in urban areas to fight for equal rights. A kind of trust was established between urban communities and the often Zionist aligned politicians who ultimately ended up representing them. Behind the scenes the Zionists and racists (Southerners and other racists) agreed to allow the Zionists to control the urban populations for them. This is why many like Schumer, Steve Cohen, and many other examples going back decades have implemented policies in these urban areas that absolutely destroyed them. It’s a long running strategy to control the levers of power in Urban areas, turn them into Gaza like police states, allow rampant drug use and property value destruction, destroy the local economies, and eventually move the poor and minorities out just like they have done in Gaza. It has been a systemic and long running campaign in many major cities in the U.S. with the full support of the Justice System, federal, state and local police, the welfare state, and many others. It’s how industrial scale fentanyl and other drugs have destroyed these communities, or how these same people worked with the Feds in the 80s to destroy black neighborhoods with the same methods used, just replace fentanyl with crack and cocaine. So yeah, it’s way past time for people like Schumer and others, who to be clear there are Zionists who work with the racist conservatives to gain control over institutions, and there are many normal Jewish people who are even in Govt who do not do these things and do not approve of them. It’s about this same axis that lets the Democratic Party continue supporting literal genocide while doing nothing, either at home or around the world.
GET OUT.
Well, okay. :(
Oh, I thought you were talking to me for a minute there.
;-)
Just another old man squatting on his job, money, and prestige. Another Mitch McConnell.
The choice between for-profit healthcare, endless wars, and financial corruption vs M4A, international rules based order, and financial regulation is the choice between having a future or not. Its existential, particularly for younger people, and they fucking know it. These motherfuckers are “leading us” straight to hell.
Yes, this needs to be said more often.
Progressives are not being ideologues. We feel intensely passionate about the things we stand for because we know what the consequences will be if we fail to act.
People who can’t imagine what it’s like to make informed decisions don’t understand this, so they project and assume we’re just playing some game of political campism, when that’s not what this is about at all.
he’s been bought and paid for long enough. he can afford to step down
So there is hope.
Understand the mandate “get the younger generation to rule and gtfo”
Chris Van Hollen is calling his colleagues: https://www.ms.now/news/van-hollen-schumer-senate-majority-leader-democrats
Let’s get the new leadership we so desperately need!
7 calls to help replace Schumer and Jeffries:
- Call Ayanna Pressley and encourage her to run for speaker of the house. She would be a great leader in addition to being the first black speaker of the house - which eliminates Hakeem Jeffries false claim only racists oppose him.
https://pressley.house.gov/contact-us/
- Call Senator Chris Van Hollen and encourage him to run for Senate leader to oust Chuck Schumer.
https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/ Numbers at the bottom of the page
- Call your representative and urge them to support Ayanna Pressley for speaker of the house.
4 & 5) Call your senators and demand they support Chris Van Hollen and oppose Chuck Schumer for Senate leader.
http://5calls.org/issue/house-senate-leadership/
-
Call Chuck Schumer and demand he step down as Senate leader: (202) 224-6542
-
Call Hakeem Jeffries and demand he step down as house leader: (202) 225-5936
Repeat every day until we have new leaders.
Has Ayanna Pressley expressed any actual interest in the role of Speaker? Serious question, because I don’t want to be supporting a candidate for Speaker who doesn’t even want it. I have also heard Joe Neguse’s name thrown into the ring, but again, I have not hear that he has any interest.
On the other hand, Chris Van Hollen has expressed his interest – “I am listening” – so he definitely has my support.
Thank you for this excellent comment, links, numbers and all. Well done.
According to Axios, Neguse is seeking the assistant speaker position. Definitely the sort of position you don’t want to be on the wrong side of the actual speaker for. So I imagine he’d “reluctantly accept” the position, but not campaign for it.
Thank you for looking this up, I really appreciate it. I think your estimation is right, but that would seem to scupper Neguse’s chances for speaker, if the selection works the way AOC says it does.
She says that the actual party caucus Speaker vote in November (not the floor vote in January) is not run as an open thing. It has a fixed ballot, and a challenger has to formally put their name forward for consideration prior to the party vote by sending a letter to the rest of the House Democratic Caucus. If they do not, and their name is not already on the ballot, the process itself does not allow them to be chosen. This seems to be quite different than the Republican Speaker elections we’ve seen, especially in October 2023.
If you’re interested, AOC just recently put out a video on her IG reels explaining the Speaker position and selection process at length. It’s a long video but well worth the listen; scroll to the end of this article for the Instagram link. I downloaded it and ended up skipping at lot of the intro (“hey everybody! hey!”) and sped it up to 1.25, but I learned a lot.
I think the best time to topple Jefferies will be next year, once a feasible progressive candidate actually emerges. Van Hollen has been lining up this possibility for a while.
“We just saw democracy in America in action. We should bring a little more democracy to the United States Senate,” [Maryland Senator Chris] Van Hollen continued. “We have two newly-elected senators who would not be there if Schumer and the [Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee] had their way.”
Van Hollen then drew a line in the sand, arguing that Schumer and the DSCC had “sided with the crypto industry” and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, better known by the acronym AIPAC.
A wave of Democratic voices have been opposing Schumer’s leadership and establishment politics since the party won the majority in Congress in last week’s elections.
Yep. Schumer has been calling these candidates and their supporters a minority voice, but those voices were overwhelming majorities this election, so let’s take a vote on the next leaders of the Democratic Party. Get rid of the good old boys policy of seniority. It’s anti-democratic, it’s anti-change.
You’re time is up, walk away with dignity. Step aside like a man.
The dignity ship sailed with treason for Israel
His time was up like 10+ years ago. All these old fucks are just clinging on to power because their lives are empty.
That’s a hard thing for a lizard to do
I was torn before because you do want someone in there that knows how to get the votes and handle getting things done, but he has proven that he’s for himself first. We’ll figure it out with a new person.
Van Hollen isn’t exactly a noob.
Pretty much this. He is a good politician when we strictly measure his ability to negotiate and secure votes. However, that doesn’t matter when he’s negotiating and securing those votes from a place of bad faith, because it is abundantly clear that his focus is on Israel first.
Schumer is Israel first, Baileys second
And I suspect his lauded ability to ‘secure votes’ is deeply connected to AIPAC’s lobbying. When he needs to secure a vote, he just calls up his Israeli buddies and has them apply pressure.
By what metric are you judging his ability to get votes? Seems to me Democrats have struggled to get any kind of legislation through the Senate for years which I think indicates that he’s not very good at getting votes.
Exactly. The only votes Schumer is good at getting is getting moderate dems to vote with the republicans.
Van Hollen isn’t new, he’s been in the Senate for 10 years and has served as chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. He knows what’s up
His lack of popularity with voters and party members doesn’t matter if this is how the dems are gonna secure their nominations. Theyre basically telling the party ‘Israel first or else’. This isnt a race, its a coronation.
That article is about this House. We’re talking about the Senate. Electing a House Speaker required a simple majority of all members. Given Democrats’ sizeable majority, this means probably 50 Representatives would have to withhold support from Jeffries. This may happen or may not. Fortunately, in the House there are mechanisms for membership to bring bills to the floor regardless of the Speaker’s wishes.
In the Senate, I think enough Democratic Senators are on board for a change from Schumer, which will force a competitive election for Majority Leader. This position has more control of the legislative agenda than the House Speaker does
You think party leadership in the Senate is gonna be less forceful than the house?
I don’t understand how you gleaned that from anything I said above
So you think the same party that’s threatening reps for control of the house simply won’t organize to the same level in the Senate, the much more powerful body of government? Explain why to me the Senate is gonna be a free and fair race from the same party willing to threaten reps over the house.
The House, Senate, and Democratic Party are all different things. You seem to think they’re all controlled by the same people, but they’re not. In the Senate, Chris Van Hollen is stepping up to challenge Schumer for Majority Leader. No one has stepped up in the House to challenge Jeffries. That Jeffries and/or his allies in the House threatened the representative who is the subject of that article has nothing to do with the Senate
No one has stepped up in the House to challenge Jeffries.
Tbh, I think the only reason AOC hasn’t done that is because of a potential 2028 presidential run
AOC doesn’t want it because being Speaker is a full time job and would not permit her to do what she’s good at, plus most of that time would be spent fundraising, which she does not believe she is capable of to the extent needed.
She released a really long explanation of the whole Speaker battle the other day on Instagram, and that’s part of what she talked about: she literally has no interest in it.
I’m not on IG, but there are Instagram viewers that will let you watch without an account, and it is embedded in this article as well (it’s at the very end). You can hear it straight from her own mouth.
The future is now old man.
If you live in one of these red states/districts that swung left this midterm, you have influence in shaping your newly elected representatives.
These are house members and senators who have not held these offices before in a political environment that is unprecedented. They know they will not hold their seats unless that figure out how to capture the magic that made this blue wave. If they don’t capture that magic, they will only last one term.
For example, do you think centralist Democrat Kansas Senator-elect Adam Hamilton know where to turn right now? He is strategizing how best to navigate he political career and needs encouragement from his voters to not tie himself to Schumer.
Anybody up for a Jan 6 march on Congress is they pick Schumer and Jeffries? Without the violence obviously?
That would be three days too late for the floor vote and over a month too late for the actual decision. The Speaker of the House will be decided in roughly three weeks, according to AOC’s recent IG video; the floor vote is just a formality.
I like the energy, maybe we time it earlier though?
I think a french style general strike would be better.
