Should Senate Dems dump Schumer as their leader after the midterm?

[WV222]

Asking the question to see if this is just worry being shown or if the BBB and voting rights debacles have people saying the Senate Democrats should dump Chuck Schumer as their caucus leader next year?

[Blue3]

Durbin is more conservative.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

No. Schumer was handed the weakest possible majority he could have and has focused on what he can get through - namely, judges and the rare bill with bipartisan support. Again, people don't understand just how little leverage he has over Manchin.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Durbin is more conservative.

He probably wouldn't be any better, but he's not more conservative.

[Ferguson97]

No, but I think he probably retires in 2028 anyway.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

No

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

The Democratic parties 3 top leaders are all 70 year old geriatrics and we’re debating this?

Incredible. Y’all deserve to lose.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

No one can convince Sinema, the D's have to win more seats in both the H and Senate to overcome Sinema if she is no longer the tie breaker they can overcome the Filibuster

Everyone talked to Sinema including Biden privately and she still won't budge on the Filibuster and politicians won't tell us what they tell each other in private

Graham is telling Rs to dump Mcconnell because of McConnell poor leadership with Trump

[H. Ross Peron]

Schumer is the most progressive Senate leader Dems can get, so no.

[free my dawg]

Nah. Schumer is not the problem - the problem is the systemic rot in the Democrat Party. Not only were many of the Democrat failures in the Senate and Congress avoidable, but the focus on Manchin and Sinema takes heat off the Shaheens and Warners of the world.

Sinema has a slight excuse, being from a conservative state, but Kelly exists. Without him, we shrug our shoulders and deal with her. Manchin is a grifting POS who legislates on his own career, but has the Democrats by the balls. Everyone here knows it's quite literally Manchin or a Republican.

I consider the Warners and Coonses and Carpers and Shaheens of the caucus - people who come from various shades of blue territory - more dangerous than Manchin and Sinema. These are states where we legitimately can do better but don't. They're states where we can and should vote for someone who supports key Democrat agenda pieces like raising the minimum wage, or the PRO Act, or legalizing marijuana.

These people may not be as conservative as Manchinema, but they're just as bought off. Take the minimum wage thing, for example. Chris Pappas, who has not only been drawn into a more Republican district, but personally loses money because he owns a restaurant, voted to raise the minimum wage. But Shaheen and Hassan won't because a Republican donor who owned a restaurant chain threatened to cut off support. These sh*tty blue state Democrats have no reason to be making the votes they do other than their egos or their campaign accounts.

This is why the "elect more Democrats" talking point people love to talk about fails. Voting for more Democrats doesn't work for me, because the Democrats I tried electing voted against it anyway! Manchin and Sinema suck, but there are about five or ten other Democrats we need to worry about. If we were like the Republican Party, these people would have lost their primaries.

Part of this is because of my own cynical views on the Democratic Party. I think they blindly chase fundraising and nothing else, leaving bad candidates like Sara Gideon and Amy McGrath to run. Ultimately a huge part of it is more because there's a lot more institutional attachment to the Democratic Party than the GOP. While Republican interest groups see the party as more of a vehicle to implement their policies, Democrats see the party as their identity.

So Democrats see these bad incumbents as Real Democrats, support them unconditionally, and the people primarying them as entryist socialist Marxist lunatics. Obviously Twitter isn't scientific but it's crazy to see the same people who called Charles Booker one of Bernie's Russian agents donating to him because he's running against Rand Paul.

This is why I'm growing increasingly cynical and pessimistic with the Democrats' future. The rot of greed is simply too deep. The almighty dollar and donor rule, and Manchin and Sinema take the focus off of the 10 others stifling progress. At this point, the only point for progress is to either spend 10 years purging the Democrats of their rot of greed or to make a new party.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Rs are the ones that want to get rid of McConnell stop making threads about disunity in the D party, the D's Haven't lost yet, it's Rs gonna dino Trump and Mcconnell if they don't win

[Blue3]

Durbin is more conservative.

He probably wouldn't be any better, but he's not more conservative.

He said Biden was too radical in his support for voting rights this week.

[GregTheGreat657]

Don't care. Schumer is a corrupt elitist, but the potential replacements aren't any better

[SnowLabrador]

No, they should dump him now.

[jojoju1998]

Who else will replace him ?

[Bismarck]

Durbin is more conservative.

He probably wouldn't be any better, but he's not more conservative.

He said Biden was too radical in his support for voting rights this week.

I believe he said calling political opponents to a voting procedure law the same as slave holding traitors was going too far. He didn’t say he opposed Biden’s policy.

[😥]

No, but Durbin would be better leader. It's bad that Durbin had not been elected in 2016

[redjohn]

No, why? It's not Schumer's fault that his caucus hinges on the votes of someone representing the most conservative state in the country + a wannabe McCain nutcase. There's nothing more he can currently do to advance Biden's agenda. That pressure needs to come from Biden, and he has relatively little ground now to push his agenda.

[President Johnson]

No, Schumer is absolutely fine. Neither too moderate or too left and has a lot of experience. He's been given a very difficult task with just 50 senators and his leverage over Manchin and Sinema is pretty limited.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

No, Schumer is absolutely fine. Neither too moderate or too left and has a lot of experience. He's been given a very difficult task with just 50 senators and his leverage over Manchin and Sinema is pretty limited.

You also said Biden whom had Hunter Biden scandal cost us wave insurance seats last Nov 2020 was the best candidate for D's and Civiqu polls have him at 38 percent it maybe a 303 map but it's not guarenteed

Cory Booker whom Obama told to drop out before Super Tuesday should of been Prez he wasn't a socialist Biden was Clyburn mistake, not yours he had the money to make Biden the Nominee, but you voted for him in the primary I voted for Bernie, no Reade or Hunter Biden scandal


Now, onto Schumer, Durbin should be D Leader not Schumer, Schumer was only elevated after 2016 because Hillary from NY also was supposed to be Prez and she wasn't