sharply criticized Chuck Schumer called Schumer’s decision a “betrayal”
That’ll show him.
this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
1258 points (99.9% liked)
politics
23431 readers
2490 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Leave the Democratic party AOC, and enough people will follow that we can maybe actually make a difference.
This idea had some merit two years ago but it’s too late. And trump proved that you can take over a party if your tribe is popular enough.
The claim has been that this idea is always 2 years too late since Jesse Jackson.
load more comments
(34 replies)
Losing in shutdown game and keep doing the same again. The lack of imagination of aged DEM is worrying.
One thing you got to give Trusk some credits is he dares to put wild unpopular ideas into action, which mostly strengthened his position, not weaken it. You got to be innovative if you want to beat him, repeating old failure is not an option.
What's still not clear to me is what the plan is if the CR is not passed. Republicans control the overall agenda in Congress. What I fear would happen is Republicans would start to fund the government bit by bit, starting with the bits they like the most.
Then in 3 months, when the Department of Education and other things are still not funded, Republicans can say "See! Democrats wouldn't let us open it. It's all AOC's fault!", and the public would buy it.
If there were a clear path to a better deal by shutting down the government, I'd be all for it. Go ahead, downvote me if you want, but I'm more interested in knowing how I'm wrong about this. If your response is "we need to stop this because it's awful", that's fine, but how does stopping it lead to something better?
load more comments
(2 replies)