Unrest is going to break out in the public’s eyes any time now. There is dissatisfaction in the Democratic ranks. If it gets any bigger, well, we’ll definitely know about it. We’ve discussed this previously, and the matter just might be coming to a head. That’s all we need with midterms heading our way. On the other hand, better now than the month before midterms! With gratitude to Raw Story:
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is facing a revolt within his own caucus over his failed recruitment of Maine Gov. Janet Mills to challenge Republican Sen. Susan Collins, with frustrated Democratic senators now demanding he stay out of contested primaries in battleground states.
Mills abandoned her campaign before the primary after failing to generate enthusiasm or donations, effectively handing the Democratic nomination to polling favorite Graham Platner.
The collapse has become a significant blow to Schumer’s reputation among his peers, according to Democratic Party insiders.
Yea that. It seems that Ms. Mills’ campaign crashed and burned without ever getting a good start. Now, in fairness, after standing up to Trump, there is no reason *not* to consider her a viable candidate. Perhaps it wasn’t the right time. But it must be humiliating to have to give up that quickly. There are a number of factors that could have come into play. We don’t know what happened, and we may never know. We still need to wish her the best.
The Hill reported that several anonymous Democratic senators are now calling Schumer’s support for Mills a “miscalculation” and a “mistake,” and are urging him to “butt out‘ in other contested Democratic primaries — particularly in Michigan and Minnesota.
“It’s a miscalculation,” one Democratic senator told The Hill, arguing that Schumer’s strategy is driven by “inertia” rather than political reality.
The senator pointed out that voters are hungry for fresh faces promising big change, not recycled establishment candidates.
“It’s easy for there to be inertia in how we approach things and it’s a formula that has worked in the past. But I think what Graham Platner did and continues to do in this election cycle is channel the economic frustration of average working people in a way that just cut through all the bull,” the lawmaker told The Hill.
You have to change with the times. You have to look at ‘now” as opposed to ‘back then’. There’s been a lot of change in America, and most of it isn’t good, thanks to our so-called ‘president’. We do need younger faces, more up-to-date views and ideas, looking forward, because the ‘Old Guard’ is, well, old. We need fresh blood coming in for the times ahead.
A second Democratic senator criticized Schumer for continuing to rely on outdated tactics.
“I don’t doubt his intention. I think he really believed that [Mills] was going to be the very best candidate, but it didn’t work out that way.
I think he’s making decisions based on sort of an old-school book of how you win elections and what it takes to win elections. Things are changing a lot,” the source said.
The senator also warned Schumer against attempting to “pick winners and losers” in key primaries, accusing him of steering donor money toward more moderate candidates like Rep. Haley Stevens in Michigan and Rep. Angie Craig in Minnesota.
Things are changing a lot. It’s happening so much that it’s hard to keep track. The only good thing, small as it may be, about Trump is that he’s always in the spotlight. When you get to Congress and state elections, that’s a whole different animal. None of us hate Senate Minority Leader Schumer, far from it. But he needs to change with the times or step down. Nancy Pelosi knew when it was time to step down. Schumer should have seen it coming, and it may be time for him to step down. We don’t know what the future holds.
See you soon!
Friends, I know everybody begs you for money. I promise you that of all of the outlets bugging you for spare change, we are the smallest and the hardest working. We’re a bunch of old, disabled people, except one writer in his mid-50s. But the rest of us are in our sixties and seventies, and this is a labor of love. All we’re asking for is the ability to continue our quest to tell the truth about Trump and help ensure democracy survives. If you can help, please do. Thank you. Ursula
These “Democrats” who are criticizing Schumer need to shut the fork up unless they’re willing to criticize Bernie Sanders when HE endorses candidates, regardless of who they are.
Sanders has been in Congress almost as long as Schumer (Sanders first entered as a member of the House in 1991; Schumer did so just a decade earlier). But, here’s the funny thing: SANDERS IS NOT A DEMOCRAT. He is a LEECH who USES the Democratic Party but consistently refuses to JOIN the Party. Even when he ran for the PARTY’S NOMINATION AS PRESIDENT (twice, by the way), he REFUSED TO JOIN the Part. And, he’s a LIAR. In 2016, after failing to win the Democratic Party nomination, he VOWED that he would run AS A DEMOCRAT IN ALL FUTURE ELECTIONS. In 2018, when he ran for reelection to the Senate, he chose to remain an Independent. And then, in 2020, he actually had the gall to–once again–try to run for the Presidential nomination from the Democratic Party. While maintaining his Independent status.
And, yet, Sanders feels he has some “right” to interfere in DEMOCRATIC PARTY elections and endorse DEMOCRATIC PARTY candidates–even in primary elections.
But, I’ll guarantee you we won’t hear any of these people criticizing Schumer (who has ALWAYS been an actual member of the Democratic Party) hold Bernie to the same standing. And, here’s a point that I am taking you to task over Susan. You wrote, “We need fresh blood coming in for the times ahead.” Well, do you know how old Chuck Schumer is? He’s 75. Yeah, I’ll grant that is pretty “old” even for politicians. But, do you know how old Bernie Sanders is? Hmm? Do you? Well, Bernie Sanders is 84. Nearly a full decade older than Schumer. So why isn’t Sanders being treated as a part of the “Old Guard” who needs to step aside or step down?
Another point, just remember that a lot of these people complaining about these “old” politicians tend to turn on their heroes pretty damned quickly. Remember when Hakeem Jeffries rose in the House? Oh, so many Democrats were virtually throwing parties and celebrating the “new blood” rising in the party’s hierarchy. That was barely three years ago, and now the same people who were reveling in his leadership role are now actively criticizing him for not “fighting hard enough” against the Administration (when, again, they fail to note the House is a different beast than the Senate and a minority leader has far fewer options).
And, on the Platner issue, wasn’t it just a couple of months ago when Platner was having to defend himself over some internet comments and a certain disgusting tattoo? But, of course, when it’s one of “our” people, we’ll ignore the warts and blemishes but when it’s one of “them,” we’ll browbeat them over those flaws. And we have no guarantee that “our” guy has actually changed (look at the Eric Swallwell situation–he was widely regarded as one of the “good guys” until some accusations were made and now, he’s a vile beast, completely irredeemable while Donald Drumpf squats in the White House as an adjudicated rapist and likely child victimizer who hasn’t taken any responsibility for his actions).
I agree with some of what you say but not with all of it. Regarding Sanders he’s been helpful in shifting the Party in a way I like but he’s given way too much leeway and credit. And, as you correctly note he flat-out lied about becoming a full-fledged member of the Party. It would be unfair I think to call him a gadfly but I long ago felt like he’d outlived his usefulness to advancing the progressive agenda. I wish he’d just go away.
You are correct to defend Jeffries because a House Minority Leader doesn’t have the tools to effectively oppose a Speaker that are available to a Minority Leader in the Senate. The two institution’s rules are quite different.
As for Schumer I’ve never thought much of him. He’s always been milquetoast and his record of successfully leading opposition is spotty. Schumer’s relatively few moments of appearing to be a strong leader were actually when standing next to Speaker Pelosi. Schumer should just shut up and go away, and make way for someone much more forceful both in character and personae. Yes, as you point out he’s “only” 75 years old and it’s also fair to note that some have been kick-ass well beyond that age. Others have been past their prime at age 60. When it comes to Schumer I’m not sure he ever HAD a prime.
He has however been around in leadership for a long fucking time and from where I sit doesn’t have all that much to show for it. The same is true of committee heads in both the House and Senate. Too many are in leadership simply because of seniority – they’ve been around ‘forever’ and have ‘earned’ their role mostly on that basis alone. That is NOT a reason to have someone heading up committees or as a member of a caucus’s leadership. You want experienced people of course. Institutional knowledge on the gritty details of how it all works is essential and it takes time to learn. And experience. However I’m of the frame of mind that with leaders we need to look at what they are currently doing and are trying to do (and how effectively) as much if not more than what they’ve done in the past.
Susan is quite correct when she says things have changed. Some things won’t ever go back to the way they once were and too many that have been around for literally decades simply don’t recognize that, or refuse to accept it. That’s why yes, new blood is needed. ANYONE leadership should be mentoring others to take over. And, hard as it is to give up power turn over the reigns when a younger, more energetic person is ready to take over. It doesn’t mean retiring from Congress completely but moving to an Emeritus role and helping out when needed as Pelosi did for a while with Jeffries.
Of course, given what she did to President Biden she’s now on my shit list and if I was Jeffries I wouldn’t trust her any further than I could throw the Capitol building.
I also detest Pelosi. And George Clooney. I was furious when they went out in public and said that about former President Biden. That’s just bullshizzle. There was NO REASON to do that!!!!!! I was quite happily supporting him.
Otherwise it seems I have no idea what I’m talking about, per Joseph, so I’m not going to try and answer anything else.
Holy cow, Joseph, do you always have to comment with an attack?
I’m not even going to try and defend myself. You wouldn’t listen.
I will say there’s more going on with Swallwell than what we’ve been told. I’m not at all certain that what we told happened actually did. It was too blatant and the accusationa came too fast.. Someone wanted him out of the governor’s race.
But I have no idea of what I’m talking about. Remember?
You are missing the elephant in the room; Israel and AIPAC. Voters have finally woke up to the reality that our government has been highjacked (for decades, really) by operatives loyal to Israel at the expense of American taxpayers.
Any candidate that is fully supportive of a genocidal Nation and receives AIPAC $$ will very likely be voted out or not get past the primaries.
I am, indeed, missing the elephant. That is something I hadn’t known about. Thank you.