- cross-posted to:
- politics@hexbear.net
- cross-posted to:
- politics@hexbear.net
Senator Jeanne Shaheen just threw the minority leader under the bus.
Senator Jeanne Shaheen revealed that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer knew the entire time about the plan for a few Democrats to capitulate to Republicans on the government shutdown.
Shaheen, one of the seven Democrats (and one independent) who dropped their demand for a guaranteed extension of Obamacare subsidies, spoke to Fox News’s Brian Kilmeade on Monday morning.
Aside from serving as further proof that the Democrats are failing to act as an opposition party in any meaningful way, Shaheen’s comments also reveal one of two possible scenarios. Either Schumer was scheming to end the shutdown behind the scenes, only pretending to be against it while pinning the blame on the eight people who aren’t up for reelection anytime soon, or he has no control over his party. Either way, it proves the need for Democrats to jettison the minority leader.
You must log in or # to comment.
Remember everyone. Moderate Democrats in USA are Center-Right in World Politics. They might as well be 2 sides of the same coin
If you are a voter who wants real change put in progressives, or indpendents that actually lean left in World politics
Run For Something trains progressive candidates to run and win. Couple days ago they won big for various elections when we had that very good day
They also have on Substack: RFS Feel Good which gives weekly updates about everything they have accomplished in & out of office
Volunteer to help more candidates & current officials to get things done!!
I wish Run for Something was doing anything in my area. Only person they got is on the other side of the state. Not even anything for the nearby major city.
If there’s nobody in your area doing anything politically exciting, it’s not Run for Something’s fault. Individuals from all over the country choose to sign up with RfS. They’re not a touring group going around recruiting from some major cities, but not others.
Perhaps you need to spread the word about RfS locally? I mean if you really want local change, it can totally start with you.
Which state? Also join other state ones, & up with other cities/towns in your state. That way you can help ech other, & they can teach you how to get others active in your area along with nearby major city to get things done. Then expand to the state
Have hope, & take action at least a couple hours a day it’ll be very worth. I believe in all of us
I live in Missouri a little over 30 minutes drive from St. Louis.
Even though Missouri is gerrymandered it can still happen. And if not then at least none of you will be alone because you will be connected to each other along with national, & international allies
Don’t have to go in person at first. They do meetings online/ phone calls/ etc. There are in person events but those are for after people are setup to get things done
Don’t waste your gas. First connect with them online, then meetup in-person. Ask them how you can get other people active too so in your area and nearby it makes it easier
RFS has an Online Community that is basically a forum too as another option to contact everybody in the community once you sign up to join. Can just use a throwaway email/Proton/Alias/etc
Look on, Bluesky/Mastodon/Lemmy/etc to contact people who are publicly posting about getting things done. Who are doing
Go at it from multiple angles. There are many people in Missouri who will want to be on your side but first you gotta find them and learn how to do together
I had not heard of this. Thanks for getting the word out
No problem!! Together we can do anything! Also read my post on political discussions community here on Lemmy. It’s an informative & morale boosting post
Edit: Here’s the link:
Run For Something trains progressive candidates to run and win
Huh? They have though. I don’t understand what you’re trying to say
I think he’s saying Mayo Pete runs for preserving the status quo?
*European politics NOT “world politics”.
Not everyone is following the same trends and left/right are relative to the society in question.
We must always be extremely careful spreading Eurocentric notions as being “the world’s view” as the history of that type of thinking is extremely ugly.
Apologies, anything you would suggest for better format of talking about it?
Yes, I would use the term “European politics”. If that makes you go “wait that sounds weird”, then don’t make that comparison.
Sorry but this is a huge pet peeve of mine. Too many people assert that what is true mostly fir Western Europe is the case for all nations and that’s silly at best.
lol but you are wrong…
Immigration, social issues, criminal justice, social safety and healthcare.
Just because YOU think of Europe doesnt mean everyone is talking about the same thing as you…
Im not sure what you are trying to day here. Can you please clarify what you mean?
You assume that by talking about healthcare they were only talking about Europe but those are all of the policies the US Overton window is further right than the norm. It’s more like “Europe, most of South America, Oceania parts of Africa and Asia.”
So no not just European at all lol
Ok you did not correctly follow that discussion.
OP claimed the perspective they gave was “the world’s perspective”. I pointed out that take is really only in line with Western Europe as every nation is in different places and you cannot really say “the democrats are center left” because outside of developed Western European nations that claim makes zero sense. For example the democrats would not be center right in almost any African nation or most of Eastern Asia.
Just like there are a ton of Americans who do not see other’s perspectives there is a massive amount of people who equate what is true for Europe as to being true for all.
Nah, it’s really important to have external framing otherwise you start to accept the present Overton Window as just the way things are. Things like 32 of 33 developed western democracies don’t have the problems the US does with healthcare. Sure, those other countries aren’t the US, but that’s kind of the point, and still relevant to conversations about US healthcare.
But that’s a singular issue. It isn’t as if everyone agrees as to the role of the police or to what degree they may become violent and under which conditions. I would argue that is an issue that is more indicative of what a society’s views on power are than healthcare would be.
Right now the GOP would be extremely progressive in Iran. There’s no “world scale” that really works.
Would the GOP be extremely progressive in Iran?
I would suspect if the GOP was in Iran they would want to dismantle much of the State Welfare Organization which provides universal health insurance, including mental health and addiction treatment.
And even if we focus on Iran’s horrific, regressive LGBT policies, are you so confident that the majority of the GOP disagrees? The current Overton window does not allow Republicans to openly propose making gay marriage or being trans illegal, but it’s safe to say that’s what many of them want. It’s practically written in Project 2025.
And on foreign policy, the GOP would never stand for Iran’s cautious de-escalatory approach. When Israel attacks, the GOP would be braying for bloody revenge.
I don’t claim to be an Iran expert, but I feel like the GOP would be center right.
The current Overton window does not allow Republicans to openly propose making gay marriage or being trans illegal,
The GOP literally lost a case for the former yesterday.
Yes proposing the removal of Islamic theocrats to be replaced with people who lean towards theocracy but are not actively pushing for it would be progressive.
The GOP doesn’t want LGBT+ people immediately imprisoned whereas Iran does.
What de-escalatory policy do you have evidence for? Iran finances a lot of militias and terrorist/paramilitary groups that engage in violence regularly.
The GOP would be progressive for Iran.
Billionaires are desperate to turn people away from the Dem party, because they can’t buy the next Dem presidential primary.
You’re pissed at Schumer? Good, he’s a giant ineffectual piece of shit
But now that he doesn’t have a corrupt DNC behind him, his days in office are numbered. So are the rest of the neoliberals and especially the ones who voted with republicans.
Don’t blame the party for what single digit number of assholes did. And definitely don’t leave the party by refusing to vote in Dem primaries.
Even if there’s nothing that could ever make you vote D in the general again, vote in every D primary and pull them left as hard as you can.
The only way neoliberals get the DNC back, is if people don’t vote in the next Dem presidential primary, a neoliberal squeaks thru, and if they become president, they name a neoliberal chair.
And neoliberals aren’t above sabotaging the Dem party to get the reins back.
It like the buy/sell ads for gold…
When billionaire owned media shits on the Dem party, it means the DNC is against billionaires.
When billionaire owned media supports the Dem party, it’s because they own it
Oh it’s another givesomefucks pro-Ken Martin comment.
Ken Martin is not an anti-establishment DNC chair, he is a continuation of their same policy. He is in his own words happy to take money from ‘good billionaires’ - those same influential donors who run the party.
When billionaires pay for the party, it means the DNC is for billionaires.
And neoliberals aren’t above sabotaging the Dem party to get the reins back.
THE DNC DOES NOT WANT TO OPPOSE THE GOP
Otherwise they would have their canidates oppose them in a meaningful way. They wouldn’t support right wing ideologies.
ffs
I generally agree, but part of the reason Schumer can’t whip votes is that he no longer controls the DNC.
He can’t direct DNC money towards the candidates that vote the way he wants, and he can’t direct money to their opponents to punish them when they break ranks.
I think this would be good for democracy, in the same way that anti-gerrymandering laws are good for democracy. … You know, except when.
Well said, we need to work with those who support us and cut out the bootlickers.
This is exactly it. I don’t think people understand how thick it is with the right trolling the left. Trolling is kind of an innocent word for it, because it has really shitty consequences.
If you’re skeptical, notice how when the right does something evil, outlandish and cruel, that there will be unnaturally quick upvoted comments going after the dems and blaming them. This isn’t a coincidence.
Its not single digit. If 8 guys sold out there are way more behind them.
Oh, we need to clean house…
We need a competitive primary for every office, every election.
With no favoritism towards an incumbent, just because they’re already there.
Primaries only hurt weak candidates, because they’re already weak candidates. And weak candidates can’t win a fair primary.
So we’re all better off if they lose in the primary so a Dem can still win the general.
How does he not have a corrupt DNC behind him?
Because Martin has a decade long track record of running fair primaries and putting 100% effort behind anyone who makes it to the general…
Like, you don’t have to put faith in Ken Martin, I’m sure as fuck never going to use “faith” to influence my politics.
But he’s a known variable. There is zero indication he’s going to act like the prior corrupt chairs (Tim Kaine who voted with republicans here was literally one of the corrupt chairs tho).
Especially since their power came from controlling the purse strings to state parties, and Martin is freely giving that power away by giving the money back to state parties, and has been for months.
I’m confident he won’t weild the DNC as a club, because he’s whittling it back down into the pencil it was always meant to be. Even if he does a 180 and the chair corrupts him, he wouldnt be able to do what prior chairs were doing.
If Martin starts fucking up, and you stay on Lemmy, I’m almost positive I’ll be the first one you hear it from. This shit is too important for blind loyalty to anyone. The second he starts fucking around, I’m gonna be bitching about it.
Personally I’ve been assuming that the DNC is the same as the one that screwed Bernie in 2016. If that’s not so then its really important to make that a news item. This current fiasco is going to make people want to abandon the Democrats as a rallying point.
I’ve been assuming that the DNC is the same as the one that screwed Bernie in 2016
That makes zero logical sense tho…
The DNC is the chair, the chair is the DNC. They have complete power and zero rails. In 2016 only the chair knew that Hillary was paying the DNC bills and in return she had final say over anything the DNC did.
If that’s not so then its really important to make that a news item.
If you’re waiting for billionaire owned media to tell you that billionaires lost the fight over the DNC…
You’re always going to be waiting.
If you’re waiting for non-billionaire owned media…
Well, I don’t know why you’re still waiting:
This current fiasco is going to make people want to abandon the Democrats as a rallying point.
Yes. That’s literally what I’m saying… That is the result they want.
The few Dems in office doing this, are doing it to turn people against the party, because the neoliberals only shot at winning the next presidential primary, is if most Dem voters don’t vote in it.
Even if it means republicans winning the general, they’d prefer that to a progressive becoming president. If that happens, the neoliberals will never get power again.
Did the billionaires really lose the fight over the DNC? I remain unconvinced because of these linked articles. No I’m not waiting for billionaire media to convince me or anyone. I’m not an idiot.
I’m saying if its the case that the DNC is trustworthy and not actually rooting for Schumer’s surrender monkey tactics, its important that that is communicated somehow to voters. But an interview or press release is not going to cut it. How about they provide evidence by taking some action, like cutting Schumer and the rest off from campaign funds? Or something.
I’m saying if its the case that the DNC
Stop thinking of it as “the DNC”.
It’s whoever the chair is. It’s a fucked system and we need to fix, but that’s the reality of it.
Like, in 2021 when Biden took office, did you think “the president was a Russian puppet, he’s still a Russian puppet!”
Even tho Donald Trump and Joe Biden are completely different people? Because that’s literally what you’re doing here.
Martin ran Minnesota’s state Dem party for a decade. Right up till the day he became DNC chair. He has a very long and documented history there, and under his leadership it went from purple to home of some of our most progressive politicians.
If he’s a biased neoliberal, he’s so incompetent that it doesn’t matter.
Either way, we need to push for as many people as possible to vote in the Dem primary. Because the more people vote in the primary, the further left the candidate is
“I took this job to fight Republicans, not Democrats,” he added. “As I said when I was elected, our fight is not within the Democratic Party, our fight is and has to be solely focused on Donald Trump and the disastrous Republican agenda. That’s the work that I will continue to do every day.”
It’s the same DNC. Ken Martin has committed to not doing anything internally and only focusing externally on Trump. We will have to see how this bold strategy plays out again.
WTF is the Democratic Party’s long term strategy?
The Democratic Party is a big tent party. There isn’t often a plan, because the party membership has many different opinions on every subject.
deleted by creator
The DNC’s strategy is for Trump to run as a Democrat in 2028.
Sadly I could so see that happening… and some crazy stupid arguement that bypasses the term limits because democrat trump is considered a new candidate.
Though I’d also say the odds of him living to the end of this term with all his health issues, is under 25% at this point.
Sadly I could so see that happening… and some crazy stupid arguement that bypasses the term limits because democrat trump is considered a new candidate
Nah, nothing crazy. Turns out we’ve all been looking at the 22nd amendment all wrong. Here’s the relevant clause:
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice,
"No person shall be elected more than twice. The 22nd amendment only applies to persons. It was never intended to apply to GodKing Trump.
Shaheen, one of the seven Democrats (and one independent) who dropped their demand for a guaranteed extension of Obamacare subsidies, spoke to Fox News’s Brian Kilmeade on Monday morning.
So she was bragging to Fox on her and her co-collaborators conservative bonafides.
Please let me be in me of your token Democrats when you complete your takeover. I’ll be good, and do whatever you want, if I can just stay in office.
Democrats as a party do have an issue with Republicans infiltrating…
Wrong way to look at it.
Democrats and republicans share the same donors. They may individually have different goals in mind, but their donors appeal to both sides to preserve a guaranteed outcome and to preserve the image of choice and opposition.
Really though what we have is anyone who wants to make a fast dime and has the gift of gab throwing themselves into the ring to try to get some of that sweet, sweet donor bribery.
The possibility of infiltrators is meaningless when the Democrats are themselves a pro-capitalist neoliberal party. Their fundamental class interests do not allow them to make reform that is beneficial to the working class. This is why whenever the Dems are in power they either outright refuse to do anything meaningful, or the reforms they do pass are so convoluted and means-tested-to-hell that they end up making things worse in some way.
this explains the perpetual right-wing movement of the government when it comes to social, ethnic and minority rights. “left-wing” parties do not reverse authoritarian changes in their terms of power, allowing the far right party to resume course when they toggle back into power.
You lost me when you called Dems neoliberal.
There are like 3 neoliberal democrats.
Democrats are mostly modern liberals.
Republicans are classical liberals and neoliberals.
Would it really hurt you to learn the definition of a few words? Reagan was the US neoliberal movement.
What are you talking about? Every President since Reagan has been neoliberal.
Sure if you are a Marxist Leninist.
Clinton embraced some neoliberal policy. Obama was not a neoliberal and tells me you don’t understand what neoliberal means. Biden was the most progressive president we have ever had lol. (Since FDR.)
But sure “neoliberal.”
Neoliberals believe in the de-regulation of capital, which has been the outcome of every president since Reagan, regardless of the words they use to win elections.
And Biden was progressive? Lol you really have no idea what words mean.
Probably not Republicans. Just cunts that had a price tag higher than most. They are all being bought off for 10s of millions of dollars if not more. They all have an exit strategy. Make sure you are manning the doors the day they finally try to make their swift exit. They have been made promises that they and their families will be safe. Make them rue that decision.
At best this is a massive gamble with the absolute last of the dregs of goodwill anyone left of center has for th democratic party. I’m predicting a lot of frustration -signalling throwing of hands in the air and performative filibusters in Shumer’s future, and not much else.
New York Democrats: primary this piece of shit and get him out of the Senate. I don’t care if his gamble pays off, he shouldn’t be gambling with the future of our country against convicted fraudsters.
I wrote both of my Dem senators asking them, begging them, to hold elections on leadership. I’ve written Schumer’s office several times, begging him to step down and get the hell out of the way. I know it doesn’t do much (especially Schumer, as I’m not a constituent), if anything, but other than my vote, I have no leverage.
Well shit man, that’s more than what 99% of people do.
deleted by creator
IDK, it seemed pretty clear to me from the start that the Democrats would only hold out until about mid November. The just wanted to wait long enough for people to start seeing their insurance rates for next year. Less than actually wanting to fix the problem, they wanted people to remember who was fighting for when the 2026 election year starts.
They should replace him with someone who has balls, like Melanie Stansbury.
The problem is we’ve heard that before, multiple times, for all the negative stunts he pulled, and yet he still sits on his Democratic throne…
Contact your senators and demand to vote to replace him.
Schummer doesn’t represent us.
He’s not up until the next elections.
But yes, the people should vote his ass out.
I feel like the plan they’re going for now is to make the shutdown a next year’s problem. It’s pretty much guaranteed to happen again at this point in 2026, right around re-elections again too.
If the pinky swear promises don’t come to fruition, then it’s likely going to be a worse shutdown than this one was. That doesn’t bode well for Republicans at midterms if those promises aren’t kept by that same token.
What will suck is people are going to have another year of higher costs because of the knock-on effects of the tariffs and higher insurance premiums now due to the ACA cuts.
Blue states need to be making up the difference for what the Federal government has failed to deliver on. We need each other more than ever to weather the storm of financial hardship caused by the Republicans in office.
I wish I shared your optimism that this is 4D chess by the Dems.
I think it’s more about kicking the can to next year than being about strategy. The best move would have been holding out this year as well as doing all that next year.
Corporate Democratic Senators were probably feeling the squeeze from their donors and some voters. For sure they’ll try to hold Republicans to their word by midterms.
For like, the longest time, I got tired of people saying both sides are bad. There has to be some good in the Democrats somewhere to balance out or overtake the shittyness of Republicans.
But now, after however many stupid avoidable moves the Democrats have made, including this one. I’m not sure anymore. Possibly, now.
The only good person in my book is Bernie Sanders, still.
Welcome to Lemmy! (First time or new account for reasons?)
I don’t trust Schumer and the Dems on any of this so if they want to build trust they need to speak out now and start by calling for Schumer to step down.
I don’t know guys, I’ve heard a lot people saying he’s totally not to blame since he himself voted against it (yes, seriously).
Remember Remember, the Chuck of November
Cowardis, treason, and plot. I see no reason why this cowardly treason should ever be forgot.
There’s a interesting notion behind the name “Shaheen”, but I don’t think you can imply symbolism of a patriotic eagle when you’re literally part of the reason why the dems caved in.
Why are any dems appearing on Fox “News”?
That is, indeed, an excellent question.
I suppose it’s the only way vast swaths of the country will believe they exist.
I mean, that’s not a bad thing to do assuming you are making the right cases. It’s more of the cases being made that’s the issue rather than where they are making them. If your case is good, you should want it to go to the people who are against you. Worse case it does nothing, best case it puts someone on the path to changing their mind.
Why are any dems appearing on Fox “News”?
To reach their target audience.
They want to appeal to the Republicans’ Never Trump demographic again.
I think it’s good that some do. I especially love Pete Buttigieg’s efforts on fox. For all those millions of chronic fox viewers, it’s the only way they’ll ever hear a rational perspective on any issues, and it might just be enough to get some of them to start thinking again.
Ehh, maybe Pete will take some notes from Mamdani and stay on a populus economic message and resist the culture war stuff.
Why do any Republicans go on CNN?
I’m guessing to get in front of millions of viewers, but I’m not an expert.
