this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2026
223 points (99.6% liked)

politics

30859 readers
2547 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] EndOfLine@lemmy.world 48 points 1 week ago (4 children)

The list consists of 6 people. Only 1 is a sitting senator.

Democratic Senate Nominees

  • Peggy Flanagan, Minnesota Senate nominee
  • Abdul El-Sayed, Michigan Senate nominee
  • Juliana Stratton, Illinois Senate nominee
  • Troy Jackson, Maine Senate nominee

Sitting US Senators

  • Elissa Slotkin, Michigan senator

Democrats Still in Senate Primaries

  • Seth Moulton, Massachusetts congressman running against Ed Markey
[–] grue@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

In other words, for everybody not in Michigan it's time to call up your senator and demand they get on the list.

[–] Thunderbird4@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

The staffer at my Republican senator’s office when I call and tell them to oppose Chuck Schumer:

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 1 week ago

How the hell did lose slotkin???

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Slotkin is a mega zionist, big business servant, and centrist darling. Schumer is not in trouble, he's retiring as chief zionist and passing the torch.

[–] Drusas@fedia.io 41 points 1 week ago (1 children)

His future? He's 75 years old! He's already lived out his career.

[–] frunch@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

Apparently in politics he may actually qualify as a spring chicken. I mean shit, he's been showing up to work and speaking somewhat coherently -- he's already ahead of a number of other high-ranking politicians just based on those criteria.

[–] ExtremeDullard@piefed.social 36 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

While you're at it, please ditch Hakeem Jeffries too: those two are about as effective at inducing excitement and kindling hope in Democrats as two wet mops left in a bucket for too long.

[–] hoppeduponcoffee@lemmy.zip 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You forgot Fetterman, too. Show them the door.

[–] dcpDarkMatter@kbin.earth 21 points 1 week ago

While I'd love to see Fetterman get kicked to the curb, this article is about Dem leadership. Schumer and Jeffries are; Fetterman is not.

I see Jeffries as a semi-sentient representation of a semi-soft dick that's currently in use in a porn video

Yeah, I agree with you on this

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

While the article is a bust, Schumer really has the problem of not actually being opposition. He is more "Republican Light" than actually trying to save the nation from the NeoNazi Republicans and their Orange Führer.

show 'em your strongly worded letters, chuck!

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 week ago
[–] LaunchesKayaks@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago
[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Alternative headline: DNC scrambles to remove DINO in their midst once even they realize the jig is up.

https://youtu.be/dijMKwZMU2Q

That's from a year ago, and the fictional couple that he constantly refers to as, "The Baileys" make an appearance.

Now do Hakeem Jeffries.

[–] Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

At least the Baileys are always on his side.

[–] Manjushri@piefed.social 3 points 1 week ago

No he's on their side. It's pretty clear from his description of them that the Baileys vote republican.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't know why Schumer should give a shit about democrats rallying against him. He will be on the ballot as a dem in New York state. It's impossible not to be re-elected, so who cares?

[–] baronvonj@piefed.social 2 points 1 week ago

He could be ousted by a progressive primary challenger, though, as we have been seeing happen quite a bit this year.

[–] BigMacHole@thelemmy.club 2 points 1 week ago

That's because these STUPID Demonrats think we should spend Taxdollars on AMERICANS instead of ISRAEL! SHAME on THEM!