The progressive group Indivisible called for Democratic lawmakers on Wednesday to replace Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) as Democratic leader after the party secured control of both chambers of Congress in Tuesday’s midterm elections.
“Yesterday, voters made it very clear that they want a new generation of Democratic fighters,” the group wrote in a social media post. “We need a leader in the Senate who is capable of leading that fight. It’s time for Senate Democrats to choose new leadership.”
The group cited the Democratic leader’s faltering approval ratings in its Wednesday statement. An NBC News poll conducted at the end of October found only 13 percent of registered voters viewed Schumer’s leadership positively.
“The American people did not elect Democrats by historic margins just to bend the knee and go back to business as usual,” Indivisible said in its statement. “Senate Democrats need to listen to the voters and turn the page on status quo politics.”
The paid opposition running the Democrats will not falter in their supporting of their Republican donors’ causes.
And?
Obama won two elections in a row, and then Trump came in.
If you think everyone who voted for a DSA candidate last night is now a Progressive you’re wrong.
Obama was like the most center-right, milquetoast Democrat we ever elected
DSA is an inherently progressing platform, so unless they’re outright lying about their beliefs, then yes they are all progressives.
That’s how words work.
so unless they’re outright lying about their beliefs, then yes they are all progressives.
Show me exactly where voting requires ‘belief.’
Plenty of people voted for Obama twice and Trump three times.
Most people vote their wallets.
You sound a lot like Mrs. Clinton. She assumed that people wouldn’t vote for a deplorable candidate.
So DSA doesn’t vet their candidates? Is that the claim here? I’m honestly confused as to what your point here is supposed to be (and I suspect you may be as well)
Candidates =/= voters.
Is that simple enough for you?
We’re talking about DSA people who already won their respective elections. Like you get that right? They were already elected, so it doesn’t really matter which voters are literal socialists, and which are just “fellow travelers” who decided to vote for a DSA candidate.
But like, you get that we’re talking about DSA candidates that have already won, right? Hillary Clinton didn’t win, so how does that situation compare in any way?
Let me put it this way.
Show me the exact words you read that made you think I was talking about DSA candidates and not the voters.
Because I’ve been talking about the voters the whole time.
Cool. As long as it means you “won” which is clearly all that matters to you.
So despite DSA quadrupling their presence in Congress, you can state with undue certainty that the number of progressive voters has remained the same. Uh huh. Right.
Normally, I’d be curious about your methodology there, but I already know there is none so don’t bother.
I won this argument the same way the DSA won on Tuesday.
The opposition was completely confused.