Scoop: Jeffries faces growing threat of 2027 rebellion

[vanessa_ca]

Mar 16, 2026
Scoop: Jeffries faces growing threat of 2027 rebellion

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) could get caught in the undertow of the very blue wave he hopes to ride into power this November as a growing number of Democratic candidates tell Axios they can't commit to backing his leadership.

-snip-

State of play: Axios reported last fall that more than 80 Democratic House candidates across the country were either non-committal on backing Jeffries' leadership or outright opposed to it. It's only gotten worse for him since then.

Mai Vang, the leading progressive primary challenger to Rep. Doris Matsui (D-Calif.), previously said she would "support the person that my future colleagues elect as our leader."
But in an unprompted statement last week, she told Axios: "The Democratic Party and its leadership—Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries—have failed to mobilize meaningful opposition to Trump's illegal war and their silence as AIPAC and corporations flood Congressional primaries with millions of dollars is deafening."
"I cannot support this kind of leadership," Vang said. "If we want to defeat Trump and rebuild trust with working Americans, we need new leadership and a new direction."

-snip

https://www.axios.com/2026/03/16/hakeem-jeffries-speaker-house-democratic-primaries

[Boo1]

1. Sure seems like is there is a giant blue wave....

that it's a pretty good indication that leadership is doing well.

[Fiendish Thingy]

5. Faulty logic

The predictors of a blue wave have much more to do with how awful this administration is, and how badly people are suffering, not with how effective Dem leadership is.

The Democratic Party has something like a 13% favorable rating, below Trump and the Republican Party.

Something, or somebody, needs to change.

[Boo1]

7. Right wing propaganda

If Democrats had a 13% favorability, they wouldn't be winning anything regardless of how bad Trump was.

[sheshe2]

8. Exactly, thank you Boo1.

[Fiendish Thingy]

9. And yet they are winning elections

The majority of voters are independents with no party loyalty, only leanings at best.

What we have been seeing is a repeating cycle of anti-incumbent sentiment.

Right now, Republicans are in power, so independents are blaming them, rightfully so.

Once Dems are back in power, especially in 2029, if they don’t govern fearlessly and unhesitatingly, starting with killing the filibuster and expanding to court, they can expect the same anti-incumbent sentiment in the 2030 midterms.

Without neutralizing the MAGA majority by expanding the court, and killing the filibuster to do so, there can be no restoration of rights lost during the Trump era, or repairing the damage of the Trump era. Every bill other than budget reconciliation will be blocked by the filibuster or overturned by the Roberts court.

If Democrats fail to expand the court and govern fearlessly, voters will hold them accountable.

So, let’s make sure we elect the absolute best, most courageous Democrats we can.

Update/correction: a recent NBC poll gave Dems an overall 30% favorability rating; I couldn’t find the 13% poll - it may have been a poll specifically about approval for Dems in congress.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/ice-is-more-popular-than-democrats-nbc-poll-shows/ar-AA1YyWAQ

[Cheezoholic]

46. I agree. But the second biggest voting block is the non voter. And they don't vote because its all the same to them

And they don't vote because their little vote can't compete with 50 million dollars worth of votes. thats the way they see it like it or not, sensible or not, it doesn't matter. We need to get those people into the game. We need to prove to them that their vote DOES matter. We do that by giving them a return on their vote. And the best way to do that is to take 1000 bucks out of some millionaires pocket and put it in theirs and SHOW them how we did it. Not tax credits or some kind of form1487-B crap. Cash money. Increase taxes on the wealthy and take some of that money and write a check to the voters. Seriously. You want to make a voter happy do that. I'm just tossing shit out there because 90 million people think the whole government thing is a game for fat rich people and they don't matter no matter who wins.

[Boo1]

59. Swing voters are a small piece of the electorate

And certainly not the majority.

80%, and probably closer to 90%, of voters will vote for their preferred party exclusively. Thats why we dont see presidential candidates fall under 45%, even in landslides.

That group can decide an election, but more of a factor is turnout. Winning elections is a signal that your voters are motivated to show up and vote for you.

[PatrickforB]

20. Well, there was a Quinnipiac poll. Here's what it said:

Congressional Approval: A December 2025 Quinnipiac poll found only 18% of voters approve of Democrats in Congress, with 73% disapproving.

As to the reputability of Quinnipiac: The Quinnipiac University Poll is widely considered a highly reputable, "gold standard" polling organization, frequently cited by major news outlets for its independent, non-partisan, and transparent methodology. It has a generally solid track record, although it has faced criticism for overestimating Democratic support in recent, closely contested national election.

So, not right-wing propaganda.

Take me, for instance. I've been a Democrat since the mid 1990s and have voted blue in every election.

But if I'm honest, I feel pretty betrayed by the Democratic party. I will tell you why. The Democrats stopped being the party of the middle class a long time ago, with NAFTA, which was bipartisan. Now, I am an economist, so you could probably call me a member of the professional managerial class, which is that educated group of people who keep things ticking. But I've been getting squeezed to death. Nickel and dime, over and over and over. It is so expensive to even live.

I volunteered for Obama's campaign in 2008 because a) I had to be part of that, and b) he campaigned on HEALTHCARE.

When he was elected, though, he took universal healthcare off the table at the behest of Wall Street, because they are the only ones who don't want it - them and big pharma, for-profit healthcare and the insurance 'industry.' And he had majorities in Congress, and please do not tell me we didn't 'have the votes' in 2009. O could have used the bully pulpit and ramrodded it through.

That is betrayal number one. Betrayal number two is when the DNC torpedoed Bernie's campaign in 2016 because the donors felt better with the Clintons and the Third Way set.

When Joe Biden was president told us for four years how great the economy was, and it was...for Wall Street and the billionaire donors and super pacs. But not for me. I was carrying thousands of dollars in HEALTH CARE DEBT.

Betrayal three is when Schumer caved in with the government shutdown when WE WERE WINNING. But hey, his donors are fine! They are happy. I do not think Schumer and Jeffries represent the rank and file Democrats all that well. I have been supporting progressive candidates because the focus groups the national Dems rely on are spurious. At best. I'm inclined to vote out most incumbents.

No one asks me what I think and when I get polls from the DNC they are all multiple choice and the things I want sometimes aren't even on there. That sucks.

I'm not a happy unit. Not only that, but it is clear, clear, clear that Elon and Thiel used their tech-bro bullshit to cheat Trump into the White House. There is no way that Trump carried all swing states, and those happy billionaires made sure with shadow counties, nonexistant ones. It's coming out. And I don't give a shit if some people think 'election denial isn't a good strategy.'

I'm calling BS on that. Election denial was A GREAT STRATEGY for Trump. He's in the Goddamned White House right now, for God's sake!

And last...I get at least twenty texts and emails a day begging for money. Seriously. The pitch always goes like this:

This issue is the latest Republican outrage. We are fighting the Republicans. Give us money so we can fight for you!

I have not donated to anyone since I gave a bunch of money to Harris. And that's another thing. Biden mistakenly ran for a second term when Jake Tapper and all those media shitheels were dogging him, and when he was finally forced out of the race he tossed the keys to Harris, who ran a great campaign, but she got cheated out of victory by the tech-bros. They got a nice tax cut, after all, and lots of sweetheart federal contracts.

I'm fucking tired of getting screwed, I guess you could say. AOC is the future of this party, again regardless of what the conventional beltway wisdom is. Because that 'wisdom' is bullshit. They have lost track of what people really need, and frankly it seems like they don't much care, as long as the donors are happy. I know I may be pissing some people off talking like this, but I look at these Epstein files and the curtain is being drawn back to show everyone in the world how depraved and vile these billionaire fucks actually are, and this has been going on for years.

Seems to me like we need a serious reset, not the same-old same-old. Take down the corruption and build something that actually has a moral compass and can get stuff done.

Oh, and you know what the biggest fucking betrayal of this country was, the nail in the coffin? The 1971 Powell Manifesto, "An Attack on American Free Enterprise," which laid out the plan for the elite takeover of this republic, hastened by Reagan killing the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 along with deregulation of cable TV. This resulted in the turning on of the Wall Street propaganda firehose - Fox, and hate-talk radio. That shit is all publicly traded. The fiduciary responsibility of the senior producers of these 'news' shows is always and only to generate shareholder PROFITS. There is nothing there about truth in news.

To my mind, we people need to wake the fuck up and stop cooperating with this shit. When I look in the mirror in the morning nowadays, I ask myself, "Does it have to be like this? What kind of world do I want for my grandkids." Cause it sure ain't this one.

[creeksneakers2]

22. What a bunch of crap

I don't remember Obama ever promising universal health care. We lost a wave election getting Obamacare. The DNC didn't torpedo Bernie. He lost because he's too far left. Joe Biden didn't put you in health care debt. Schumer did not cave on the shut down. Seven or so members did.

Those of us who are fighting the real war against Republicans get stabbed in the back by "progressives" all the time. Look at that candidate in the OP. He's fighting the wrong party. Hope he loses.

[betsuni]

26. There's so much wrong, all the greatest hits.

Like deindustrialization and globalization didn't start until NAFTA -- it was all Bill Clinton's diabolical plot to destroy the working/middle class because of money. And anyone can look it up and find out that the ACA passed the House with a public option but Leiberman wouldn't vote for it with the public option so it was removed in the senate (needing a filibuster proof 60 votes which they had for three months and ten days) and had nothing to do with Republicans or Big Pharma or Wall St. money. The RIGGED! conspiracy theory...

[creeksneakers2]

38. We tried for a public option

Lieberman screwed us. Don't blame all the rest.

I'm sure Bill Clinton believed NAFTA would help everybody.

[lees1975]

28. Then you must have a very short memory.

The DNC did, in fact, work as hard as it could to keep Bernie from winning, even though he had momentum and was getting the votes. Joe Biden promised to help Americans who were suffering under health care debt, a vague, non-specific promise that was fixed to keep him off the hook when it didn't happen. And Schumer, as Minority Leader, could have taken a stance on keeping the shutdown going and got his members in line, which is what a good minority leader does. But he let them set the pace and make the choice. Disapproval doesn't mean I'll vote for the other side, but I sure have the right to be critical, and to offer my ideas, and I make my calls and send my emails and I've even walked into offices of Congressmen and Senators and laid out my frustrations and my perspective on how they can help make things better.

I disapprove, but that doesn't mean I'm voting for the other side. That's just as ridiculous as making excuses for mistakes.

[creeksneakers2]

39. Nope.

I watched and researched the whole thing. Bernie made lots of accusations against the DNC but never offered any evidence except that for a short time he didn't get the debates schedule he wanted. He was not ahead more than briefly.

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-new-actions-lower-health-care-costs-and-protect

"“We’re going to end medical debt. By that I mean we’ve already made sure medical debt can no longer be put on your credit report. "
https://rollingout.com/2025/01/08/biden-medical-debt-credit-protection/

https://www.npr.org/2025/01/07/nx-s1-5251328/medical-debt-will-soon-be-wiped-off-credit-reports-for-millions-of-americans

Schumer has to get elected so he can't alienate all the members.

If you don't want to help the other side attack Republicans.

Did you lodge a complaint about me? Somebody did. This is supposed to be DEMOCRATIC Underground but a bunch here don't see it that way.

[PatrickforB]

66. I lodged no complaint. You have every right to feel as you do. Same as me. That is what makes it 'Democratic'

Still, look at that third paragraph, beginning, "We're going to end medical debt." OK. Sounds great. But then look at the second line. "By that I mean we've already made sure medical debt can no longer be put on your credit report."

The clause I have italicized makes the assertion 'end medical debt' false, doesn't it? Because taking something off your credit report is NOT the same as 'end' the debt, is it? It might not be on my credit report, but I sure STILL OWE IT.

See what I mean? I'm tired of the crap. Being told how great I'm doing, when it is not really true. Now, I don't expect the government to do everything for me, but I also do not see why the government cannot put policies in place that make the day-to-day in the capitalist utopia that is America just a tiny bit easier.

The 2016 primary was what it was. And I don't care to fight that again, but I saw what I saw. Bernie did get torpedoed by the DNC, and I will stand by that. Why? Because in my position I see some of the internicine mechanations of politics in my own state and I know it is much more rough and tumble at the national level. Here's a report on that from the NYT (publicly traded, profit driven) that lays it out as I have (from Google AI summary, but not verbatim):

Leaked 2016 emails revealed that top Democratic National Committee (DNC) officials actively favored Hillary Clinton and discussed ways to undermine Bernie Sanders' campaign. While the DNC publicly claimed neutrality, the emails showed internal hostility, leading to the resignation of DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and an apology to Sanders.

Key Details of the 2016 Controversy:
-Emails showed DNC officials questioning how to raise doubts about the Sanders campaign and portraying it as "a mess".
-The DNC was accused of favoring Clinton via fundraising agreements and controlling party resources.
-DNC officials and the Clintons (who play really rough) questioned Sanders' faith and questioned his bona-fides in civil rights. Seriously. They DID.

Resignations and Apology: Following the release of the emails by WikiLeaks just before the 2016 convention, DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned, and the DNC apologized for the "inexcusable remarks". That also happened, and Donna Brazile, the incoming, was left trying to pick up the pieces, and she chose to cast doubt on the allegations that led to Wasserman Schultz resigning.

Anyway, as to lodging complaints, I am not that sensitive. Anyone is quite free to say I'm full of crap, because I'll be right back at you with data and citations of my own. But I don't want to argue. You be you and I will be me. But I'm going to be supporting progressives of the AOC/Mamdani stripe from now on, because they ARE NOT 'far left radical' like the corporate media propaganda apparatus likes to portray them. That's Wall Street/billionaire parasite bullshit. AOC is a New Deal Democrat that has a moral compass and wants to stick up for working schmucks like pretty much everyone on here.

[creeksneakers2]

70. I went through every one of those E-mails

The ones where they discussed Bernie were only private conversations between them. No actions or plans for actions. Its understandable that they didn't like Bernie, since Bernie falsely accused them of intervening. They did not harm him. I'll give you the same challenge I gave back then. The E-mails are online and searchable. https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/ There was some discussion at the end about keeping Bernie from disrupting the convention.

Lots want more from the government but someone else has to pay for it. People are reluctant to do that. Too much and Democrats lose. Then we all lose.

[SocialDemocrat61]

73. Thanks

Too many cling to the fiction that the DNC torpedoed Sanders in 16.

[SocialDemocrat61]

61. No, it wasn't the DNC

It was Democratic primary voters.

[betsuni]

67. "Rigging" debunked: "The Myths Democrats Swallowed That Cost Them The Presidential Election" Kurt Eichenwald.

http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

[PatrickforB]

63. Think what you will, Creek, and I will base my opinions on what I see. n/t

[creeksneakers2]

71. I can back up everything I post.

[lees1975]

29. Well said!

[Karma13612]

49. I got goose bumps reading this.

I would hope you consider submitting this as a standalone diary or post or whatever it’s called.

This is exactly how I see things as well. You just said it better than I ever could.

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

[lees1975]

23. That's not necessarily true.

There are Democrats whom I disapprove of, in some cases at a very high level of disapproval, but I still wouldn't vote Republican and I wouldn't stay home.

The worst Democrat out there is better than any Republican, with few exceptions. And in a rare case, say if John Fetterman was on the ballot, I'd either write in my own name or leave it blank.

If I were asked about my "approval" or "disapproval" of Democrats as a whole right now, I would say that I disapprove. I'm disappointed that those in Congress aren't being as aggresive as Republicans were when they were in the minority the first two years of the Obama Administration, when they blocked most everything he wanted to do. I am disappointed that some Democrats still think "bipartisan" is a positive word leading to acccomplishment of their agenda. I'm especially disappointed that when they did have the chance to do something, be aggressive and put an end to this crap, between 2021 and 2023, when we had both houses and the White House, the old heads said, "Nah, too extreme, it would look too political."
There's too much nest feathering and fund raising and PAC money and too little attention being paid to the kind of effort it will take to pry the jackass out of the White House and land him in prison.

But that doesn't mean I would ever vote Republican.

If Democrats don't learn from and respond to the disappointment they've created, and the mistakes they are making, and don't want to hear the criticism, then this crap is going to go on forever. I'm only interested in a politician who is willing to sacrifice the comfy six fugure salaried job in Congress for the good of his or her constituents, instead of refusing to do something for which there might be a political cost. And we have several of those in office right now.

[creeksneakers2]

40. Most of Trump's major initiatives got zero Democratic votes.

[BannonsLiver]

58. Tbf he's probably not getting the latest polling data and the nuance on the ground up in Canada.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

14. According to whom?

"The Democratic Party has something like a 13% favorable rating, below Trump and the Republican Party."

[Fiendish Thingy]

16. Couldn't find the source

Posted link for another recent NBC poll show Dem favorability at 30%, lower than ICE.

[Buzz cook]

21. No Kings, Indivisible

While Trump being shit motivated people to protest and vote; those protest have generated their own energy. More people have been activated by those protest and that means more boots on the ground for this election.

[W_HAMILTON]

36. We are a "vote against something" nation, despite some on the left claiming otherwise.

[Fiendish Thingy]

50. Well, we certainly have been for 50-60 years

And that will continue until Dems decide to govern fearlessly, and give people something to vote for.

[quaint]

53. In Newsom-loving California, it is very possible a Republcan will be the new governor.

[Fiendish Thingy]

56. Yup

There are some selfish primary candidates with no chance of winning who refuse to drop out.

Some of them, I suspect, are tech bro sponsored saboteurs (the mayor of San Jose comes to mind)

[3Hotdogs]

13. Actually it's a sign that people are waking up to the fact that the Maggots are full of shit.

[Intractable]

30. No. It's an indication of how much people are fed up with Trump.

They don't like us much either, otherwise Kamala would have won.

[Bettie]

48. Racism and Misogyny

are the "values" that the majority in our country hold.

Sad, but it seems to be true.

[iemanja]

64. That is a function of Trump's idiocy

not the absence of an opposition.

[BootinUp]

2. Will Democrats be their own worst enemy again?

[Fiendish Thingy]

3. Good

About time someone held their feet to the fire.

No more politics as usual.

[Celerity]

4. Good. nt

[AZJonnie]

6. To make it 3 in a row

Also fine by me, to me Jeffries is a big

[leftstreet]

10. Good

[Cheezoholic]

11. There is a HUGE number of people who are fed up with the entire system as a whole, and the revolt in our party is real

We need to be ready for this. We need to pivot before they do. If we win the midterms I'm really not sure impeachment is the answer. People are sick of that game. I think trying to impeach him IF we win in Nov could hurt us. Just let him keep burning it down, we'd at least have him checked. IF we win we need to start offering up new ideas, even if they're the same old ones in a different wrapper, so what. We need a fresh look. All respect to Hakeem but he's like listening to a robot more often than not. Same delivery. Atonal. Same with Schumer, looking over his spectacles, predictable delivery over and over. Passion, we need passion mainlined into our party's veins.

I don't live in an area that is solid blue or solid red, although it is more pink than purple. But it is blue collar and those folks are fed up with everybody in government, rightly or wrongly, red or blue, its where they're at and it's where we need to be ready. Same 'ol same 'ol politics ain't gonna cut it. And we also need to be ready for the coming collapse of white collar jobs. It'll be here by '28. We need to be quick on our feet and able to have a platform thats flexible while focusing on affordability.

Money, money, money. Cash money in peoples hands.
Respectfully

[OldBaldy1701E]

41. "Same 'ol same 'ol politics ain't gonna cut it."

Then, we are in trouble, because that seems to be the only thing we want to do.

[Cheezoholic]

43. Yes we are. There are charismatic passionate leaders in our party. They are being dampened by old money and thinking

This race to the middle to try and get more repukes to our side is futile, forget this middle of the road we accept all BS. Of course we do, its been pounded into voters heads forever and they know it. They know we are a better fairer choice as a whole. BUT when we get our turn it seems to them nothing changes. Yes there are reasons for that that we all know but to the everyday voter who doesn't pay attention to the political spectrum the way folks like us on this forum do they don't see Joe Manchin and Sinema stopped us. They don't see 2 votes stopped our entire platform. If you've ever had a boss that wanted something done and would except 0 excuses no matter how valid, just do it, thats the average voter. Do what you said you were gonna do and don't whine that you can't.

And one more thing that I harp on and you may or may not agree is the 90 million who sat on their ass in '24 and didn't vote. Most weren't lazy, most were just fed up. And most WANT THE BIG MONEY OUT OF POLITICS!! They feel like their little vote doesn't matter when politicians are taking 100s of millions of dollars JUST TO CAMPAIGN!! Political campaigning has become a multi billion dollar INDUSTRY and those that run campaigns lobby the piss out of Congress to keep the machine going because they are making millions off of our political system, which is a crime IMO. 50% of the people I know didn't vote in '24. Some because they were fed up for all the reasons that have been expressed on this board but most because of the MONEY. Taking money from rich people, keeping rich people from rigging the system. Yes that's a very old democratic platform but it is the one old one that works as long as we get results. When we promise this and don't deliver people get fed up and drop out.
I often make the analogy of the wise fisherman. There's one side of the lake that the fish will bite 3 different baits. Guaranteed a haul of fish there so everyone fishes there with the same 3 baits. The one who catches the most goes back and forth but they're always catching them. Another fisherman fishes there, catches a bunch but KNOWS there a slew of other fish on the other side of the lake but they are hard to catch. But that fisherman goes over there and tries and tries until he's found a bait that works. But then it stops and he needs another bait that works. he ends up with 10 different baits but catches twice as many fish as the goobers fighting for the same fish with the same 3 baits on the other side.

Yeah, it's stupid analogy but damn it, thats where we need to be fishing for votes because repukes aren't even going there. If we can get 10% of that 90 million we will never lose. We could even force the other side back to reality instead of chasing them off the cliff for votes. We need to stay on affordability not impeaching an 80 year old nut job. We need to use a midterm win to check him and then start pounding what we are going to do on affordability if the voters give us a chance in '28. Grab the narrative right out of his lame duck hand. They are practically handing us MASSIVE wins, especially in the Senate, in '28 on a silver platter. We could have power enough in '28 to change everything for the next 40 years. That rare occurrence where a party has a filibuster proof Senate and even 2/3rds in Congress.

We have to change and fast. Sorry for rant, it just irks me to see same 'ol same 'ol. We have a chance to change the world right now like we haven't since the 30's or the 60's
Death to Money in Politics


FF!!!

[usonian]

12. Coach Mike and I agree on one thing.

Let it be a competition.

[angrychair]

15. I understand

I will always vote Democrat because the alternative is actual Nazis.

That said, I'm not confident we have the ability to fix anything. While the current slate is way better than actual Nazis, that is a pretty low bar.

We seem to have lost the desire to dream bigger.

Obama had his missteps but he at least dreamed a little bigger and got the ACA through.

We need to dream bigger and believe in the American people to be better.

If we can't do that than what is the point?

[littlemissmartypants]

17. 💵 🗳

Pretty dark

— The Tennessee Holler (@thetnholler.bsky.social) 2026-03-18T03:12:07.853Z

I'm guessing, the "pretty dark" is a pun relative to the dark money in politics.

❤️

[Cheezoholic]

44. It's gotta stop and if we make that part of an affordability platform it's a winner

Money in politics is the main reason people don't vote. It makes no sense but its the psychology of my 1 dollar vote against a superPACs 10 million dollar vote. And it's not just dark money, it's all money. Its now a multibillion dollar industry which is even scarier. Its disgusting to me.

[Wanderlust988]

18. It's just tea talk. If Dems win in a blue wave, they'll be winning in red and purple districts.

These Dems are not likely going in there to blow up the system. Besides, I don't like this talk. This sounds like MAGA talk last year. WTF are they blowing up exactly? We don't control the presidency or the SC. We may not even control the Senate. I think it's all a bunch of horsesh**.

[Cheezoholic]

45. If we take congress then we can check most of them. We then have a voice over a lame duck loudmouth

We must then use that voice "smartly" to set up '28. Especially if we don't have the Senate forget about impeaching this asshole. Just let him rant and rant and rant. We will block their BS bills and put our own on the floor over and over even though the Senate won't pass them or even if they do he'll veto them. Wash rinse repeat. get under their skin. piss them the hell off. thats when their true colors come out. The brawl they had when they threw Kev out of the Speakership was a lesson for us. These fuckers will self destruct if you let them. We just need congress to stop him. they will do the rest for us.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

19. So, one person, "unprompted"

Probably not much has happened in the country or the world since "last fall."

One bitter candidate equals a "scoop"??

Don't people ever get sick of this?

[Quiet Em]

60. I noticed that too.

Only one person on record. Also the key word being "candidates" not actual elected House members.

On another note, I do understand and agree with a lot of the criticisms of Schumer, but I do not understand or appreciate the constant bashing of Hakeem Jeffries.

Progressives should model themselves more like AOC and Zohran Mamdani. Those two sell progressive economic ideas and do so without unneccessary bashing of other good Democrats and the Democratic Party. They don't divide, they lift. They know that the people standing in the way are Republicans, not the Democratic Party.

[Intractable]

24. I would happily see Jeffries and Schumer be voted out of leadership.

As long as they take AIPAC money, they will not be leading us to peace.

[gulliver]

25. Jeffries may need to rebel the other way

I'm far from convinced these "I don't like AIPAC" types bring to our Dem table as much as Jeffries and Schumer. The former may need to suck it up and be loyal, big tent Dems.

[Intractable]

27. "I don't like AIPAC" types

Politicians who take AIPAC money support the Israeli aggression. They will do little to rein in Israel.

[gulliver]

31. We'll have to agree to disagree

I don't think Israel is the aggressor in any of these cases recently. Most importantly, I've yet to hear any Israeli protesters or government leaders shouting "Death to America." Anyone who does that is an enemy of the United States and should be dealt with as severely as the context allows, imo.

Jeffries and Schumer are Democrats and Americans. We Dems hold America above any other country in our loyalty and concern for our fellow citizens. Kind of goes without saying, and I assume you agree wholeheartedly. That's what I mean by big tent.

[Intractable]

32. We seriously disagree. I see the Israelis as dangerous aggressors.

I used to support Israel wholeheartedly. I know better now.

[PeaceWave]

34. I agree with Gulliver. Anyone chanting "Death to America" and aggressively pursuing an A bomb is bad news.

[W_HAMILTON]

37. I care more about our country and its citizens than I do fucking Israel.

[betsuni]

33. Republicans are the threat. If Jeffries isn't speaker, someone else will be. So what.

Then everybody can whine about that person for a nice little change.

[BeyondGeography]

52. I laughed

[get the red out]

55. THIS!

Democracy is hanging by a thread! This article just promotes navel-gazing to Dems.

[Mysterian]

62. So maybe they won't go on TV and praise Trump's immigration policy

like Jeffries did recently.

[Bread and Circuses]

35. Clean HOUSE.

We want democrats who represent the people NOT the donor class.

[QueerDuck]

47. Horse hockey!

[bucolic_frolic]

51. Where will you get the money to pay for the new direction?

It's all about money. No money, no majority. Grass roots funding only goes so far. 1932-type watershed elections are rare, and they are rarer from the left than from the right.

[Joinfortmill]

54. Yup

[Autumn]

57. It's about damn time.

[the_liberal_grandpa]

65. I think Democratic voters want something different going forward.

This video explains perfectly why Democrats have such a low approval rating.

?si=KE0wRfrfDw2duKfe

[Duncan Grant]

68. 21:40

Just wanted you to know someone bothered to view it. 👋

[Celerity]

69. Great video, you should make it an OP

[maliaSmith]

72. Jeffries

I think Jeffries is smarmy. I would like AOC to be Speaker.