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.”

    • oozynozh@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      44 minutes ago

      he may not be the best we have but might be the best we can get right now. ousting Schumer is the first step in the right direction.

  • melsaskca@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    11 hours ago

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

  • yonderbarn@lazysoci.al
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    11 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.

  • mantricx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    21 hours ago

    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.

  • ExtremeDullard@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    222
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    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.

    • cattywampas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      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.

      • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 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.

      • voidsignal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        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.

        • danc4498@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          23 hours ago

          Google says there’s only ever been 1 president who was speaker and 1 who was senate majority leader. Accepting these roles seems like a career death sentence.

          • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Wait, if there’s only one president who was speaker that has to have been Gerald Ford, who was never elected to executive office, he just replaced vice president Agnew then president Nixon after each stepped down Nevermind, Ford was house minority leader.

            Looks like the speaker was James K. Polk, and the majority leader was Lyndon B. Johnson. Johnson makes sense as he was brought in for vice president to get the south on board with Kennedy.

            • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 hours ago

              Unless you’re the sort of person who isn’t satisfied with being senate majority leader and swinging “Jumbo” around

      • bedwyr@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 day 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.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          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.

          Nice barely veiled racism

          • bedwyr@piefed.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            That is too stupid to refute, unless you describe how that is racist, and whom it is racist against, white people? Praytell!

    • jimmy90@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      11 hours ago

      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

    • Malica@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      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.

      • ikidd@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        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.

        • Matty Roses@lemmy.librarysocialism.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 hours ago

          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.

        • ExtremeDullard@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          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.

          • ViceroTempus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 day ago

            Yes, I’m of the opinion that if Dems don’t perform, the government won’t be the only one ignoring “Due Process”.

        • bedwyr@piefed.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Because supporting moderate democrats has stopped the fascists so well?

          Don’t vote shame people bro. You are wrong.

        • kreskin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          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.

          • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            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.

              • Matty Roses@lemmy.librarysocialism.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                10 hours ago

                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.

              • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                23 hours ago

                Do you care more about personal strategy or the well being of an entire nation? Long term thinking prevents democratic votes more than anything.

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        20 hours ago

        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.

        • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          12 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.

        • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          Most people rejected his message. They hated WoodScientist because he told the truth.

          To be honest, I think there’s a serious possibility, if a president attempted to dismantle the “national security” apparatus, the NSA would stage a false flag attack themselves to discredit them and protect their positions. Even if the president had hard evidence that they had done so, it’s doubtful that Americans would believe it or care. There’d be back to back media coverage talking about how the move puts Americans at risk and warning of an attack, then an attack happens, people’s minds would be made up in an instant, and any pushback would be seen as both treasonous and blindly loyal to the president.

          Look at the Cold War and how many times the CIA manipulated elections or overthrew democratically elected leaders, just for the sake of bananas being a little cheaper from a minor country half the world away. Do people really think they didn’t have contingencies in place for the possibility of a socialist president being elected, or just one who interfered with their aims? Why? Did they just have so much respect for democracy? Or did they somehow lack the capability to interfere, when they so easily did so abroad? And if they had contingencies then, what happened when to actually break that power?

          The last time a president really acted against the aims of the intelligence community was when JFK fired Alan Dulles, months before he was assassinated. Dulles somehow ended up on the investigative committee into the assassination. Whether he was behind it or not, he was treated as above suspicion despite having the clearest motive.

          Even if you somehow avoid getting assassinated and stop them from orchestrating a false flag, it’s likely they have connections in the media they can use against you. Try to suppress that, and you’re an evil authoritarian tankie. Basically any tool that the president, or that any head of state around the world, can use to survive when US spies are trying to get rid of them, is “authoritarian,” which in turn can be used to justify acting against them more openly.

        • NewSocialWhoDis@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          19 hours ago

          The innocent lives lost to criminals should be weighed against the innocent lives lost to these law enforcement groups enabled by the spying apparatus.

  • [object Object]@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    137
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    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.

    • ikidd@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      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.

      • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        To play devil’s advocate, the super-delegate system wasn’t decisive in Hillary’s victory. Jacobin has a good article on this that’s for some reason a pain in the ass to find, but the short of it is that 2020 was actually worse on the ratfucking front. Aside from the usual bullshit with mainstream media and funding, one thing they did was be deliberately irresponsible with primary dates in the middle of the pandemic to depress turnout, which favored Biden at the cost of literally getting their constituents killed.

        • ikidd@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          23 hours ago

          And 2024 was basically a kingmaker play when there was an actual convention coming up after they convinced Biden to step down. Could have had a democratic selection of the candidate then, but fuck no.

      • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        The current DNC Chair supported progressive candidates.

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

        • WraithGear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          good then it can be further not like then by kicking shumer and jefferies out of their chairs!

          • Triasha@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Congress makes that decision. If you have a democratic representativenin the house or Senate. Call them. Write them a letter. Go to their local office in your city if you can.

        • MrNobody@quokk.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          23 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.

  • Gates9@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    21 hours ago

    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.

    • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 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).

      • Gates9@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 hours ago

        You’re probably right but we should try organize accordingly anyway. The leadership, the “consultants”…No right wing Democrat should have a moment of tranquility in public. Frankly, there should be protesters outside of every one of their houses 24/7.

        • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

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

          • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 day ago

            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.

            • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 day 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!

  • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    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

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      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.

      Sounds like a purity test. We dont do those in the USA.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        BLuE mAgA

        Maybe if you actual purity testers demonstrated that you gave a single flying fuck about taking action ever, people wouldn’t point out that optical purity is all you care about.

        Now, as I should’ve done a very long time ago, I am blocking you.

  • leadore@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    17 hours ago

    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.