1209

Summary

Democratic divisions intensified as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Nancy Pelosi sharply criticized Chuck Schumer for supporting a Republican-led funding bill to avoid a government shutdown.

AOC called Schumer's decision a "betrayal," urging Senate Democrats to reject the legislation backed by Trump and Elon Musk. Pelosi called the bill a "devastating assault" on working families.

Schumer defended his stance, arguing a shutdown would empower Trump and Musk further.

The controversy sparked suggestions among Democrats that AOC might challenge Schumer in a primary.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old

AOC obviously didn't get the message. The Democrats have completely given up on the Kafabe of pretending to be an opposition party.

no but you don't understand! IF YOU HAD JUST VOTED, WE COULD HAVE HAD TEN CHUCK SCHUMERS TO VOTE FOR THE FASCIST CRAP! so really everything bad that happened is your fault for not voting. how dare you fail the democratic party like this.

[-] Scott_of_the_Arctic@lemmy.world 25 points 1 day ago

Are we calling him Cuck Schumer yet?

[-] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 37 points 1 day ago

Start a fucking progressive party already

[-] HiddenLychee@lemmy.world 29 points 1 day ago

As far left as I am, that would guarantee the Republicans would win every election until we get ranked choice vote

[-] tamal3@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

This is what we need to be talking about as a country right now. How do we open up the political binary to include viable third parties? Does that require proportional representation? Does that require a parliamentary system?

I know in NC getting a third party on the ballot requires signatures and a portion of the vote in the previous election. Those bars are too high and risky. What is another path?

[-] whoisjinxed@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

False. Bernie would have won.

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 1 day ago

That'd be a threat if the dems were actually willing to improve the country not just be controlled opposition

[-] HiddenLychee@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

Honestly how I'm feeling these days. I honestly think their preferred state is not being in power, that way they don't have to keep any promises and get to keep their jobs all while doing nothing but complaining about Republicans.

[-] GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago

I honestly think that both parties like to not be in power for this very reason. All the money and none of the responsibilities. Pretty sweet setup

[-] Lawdoggo@lemmy.world 6 points 20 hours ago

Not to mention fundraising

[-] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago
[-] girlthing 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

sizzling hot take: all political parties end up as tools for elites to capture power

truly a bold and newfangled idea, surely only a few radical extremists could buy into it. surely parliamentary socialists in Meiji-era Japan, for instance, would never derive this dangerous concept from first principles

[-] BostonSamurai@lemm.ee 13 points 1 day ago

Dems need to stop pretending Schumer is the only problem, any other dem in his position would have done the same thing including AOC. The party is rotten to the core it’s just a revolving door of sycophants who server wall st and capital. The party is working as intended. Notice how Dems never have power to make actual change, never have the backbone to oppose republicans, and when they have majorities they never use their power for actual progress or at the very least codifying laws like roe v wade ect. They are there to act like an opposition party not actually be one. The working class is perpetually screwed.

[-] TripleIris@lemmy.wtf 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

I will never again take AOC or any other "squad" member seriously as long as they proudly call themselves Democrats. Go independent like Bernie or start another party. Until then, if they want to keep giving themselves the same label as Schumer or Fetterman, I'm going to lump them in the same batch of assholes and idiots.

[-] PNWKid@lemm.ee 8 points 18 hours ago

That’s a fucking retarded hill to die on.

[-] Z3k3@lemmy.world 4 points 14 hours ago

Its funny I have suddenly seen the leave the party thing pop up in multiple places at the exact same time.

Beginning to think it's AstroTurf to get the noise people out of the way and into 3rd party oblivion

[-] whoisjinxed@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago

Not really.

[-] Sovereign@lemm.ee 1 points 17 hours ago

Wasn’t this a CR for the dem’s own spending bill..? So its the same bill the dems had right?

[-] burgerpocalyse@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago

the bill has funds for departments and agencies that dont exist anymore and it would give the administration a giant pile of free money with no strings attached

[-] WorkshopBubby@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 day ago

I have been extremely pro-democrat and it has driven me insane how the far left ONLY ever shits on democrats when they are objectively better than republicans on every single issue. Democrats generally vote in the direction of increased taxes on the rich, more access to healthcare, better safety nets, etc. while republicans are just demons who obstruct all progress for the sake of destroying the world. But after Trumps election, watching the cowardice of the dems actually fucking disgusts me. They might as well be republicans with their lack of response. Just a fucking disgrace. Fuck Cuck Schumer. I will stop defending dems. Trumps election is the official end of both parties. Neither of those parties can be allowed to survive if the US manages to survive this.

[-] Saint_La_Croix_Crosse@midwest.social 3 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Democrats aren't generally pro taxing the rich or deviating significantly on many issues since Clinton and the 90s. Yes, some of the squad said that they were pro-taxing the rich when they knew that there was no possibility of it being brought to a vote and the Democrats maintained a pretend opposition to the extreme violations of civil rights in the war on terror or ICE deportations. But after Obama, the most extreme and worst excesses of the war on terror were bipartisan, and after Biden all ICE and immigration policies were fully bipartisan (he continued the obviously facetious use of COVID as a terrible, contagious disease to deny asylum seekers, just as Trump did, after saying COVID was over, and continued deportations and putting immigrants in ICE concentration camps, when 4 years prior Democrats could understand that was fascist). That is why the left hates Democrats. Because the two-party system means the Democrats can absorb all opposition to the Republicans, while continuing all of their policies and claiming that wanting any movement to the left/away from fascism is only helping the Republicans. That we should just continue the Republican's policies, but it is fine because Obama is going to file the paperwork correctly to send Arabs to blacksites or Biden is going to file the paperwork correctly to do ICE deportations at a greater rate than Trump [term 1] or genocide in Gaza. The Democrats are above criticism and should be allowed to do fascist immigration policy or genocide.

[-] PeteZa@lemm.ee 15 points 1 day ago

As she should.

[-] Debs@lemmy.zip 40 points 1 day ago

AOC needs to form a new party or at least go independent with Bernie. I'd really like an alternative to the Democrats because I'll never be voting for them again.

[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 22 points 1 day ago

No. She's on a path that will shape the democrats of the future. If she leaves she will become irrelevant, and she knows it.

[-] AoxoMoxoA@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

After this fine display by maga and the DINO's I see a schism coming from both parties.

[-] Ledericas@lemm.ee 1 points 18 hours ago

the gop's schism of the maga, it already has occured with them, most of them had to embrace maga or risk getting primaried by trump aligned maga gop. there isnt one for the DNC yet

[-] Theprogressivist@lemmy.world 236 points 2 days ago

Challenge him. He's has no business being a party leader if he's as spineless as the Republicans who pushed this bill.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] Viskio_Neta_Kafo@lemm.ee 11 points 1 day ago

Hopefully she will run for his seat in the future.

[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 38 points 1 day ago

We will NEVER make progress by compromising with those who will not compromise with us in return.

[-] ChristmasIslandZone@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago

His vile cowardice is something I'm seeing people talk about, but the sheer stupidity of it isn't touched on.

CHUCK. HE IS GOING TO FUCKING KILL YOU! THE D NEXT TO YOUR NAME MAY AS WELL BE THE STAR OF DAVID ON YOUR CHEST YOU DUMB FUCK! DICTATORS DO NOT LET "OPPOSITION" PARTY MEMBERS LIVE. NO MATTER HOW HELPFUL THEY WERE IN GIVING THEM POWER!

Like are you fucking stupid?

[-] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 2 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

There's plenty of opposition parties in Russia, for example. They're just all controlled. They use intentional gaffs to throw the election to the "correct" winner. If they start getting too uppity and stop following orders, they get banned from running on some technicality.

Navalny is what happens when even that doesn't work, but he was very much the exception.

Democrats are currently proving that they are controlled opposition.

[-] VoodooAcupuncture@lemmy.world 41 points 1 day ago

I hope she primaries him. Vote all those decrepit elders out of office.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 85 points 2 days ago

Schumer's argument is shit. They're going to go after government agencies with or without the funding bill. With the finding bill they get to choose. Without it they have to shut down everything. Passing that bill means they get more maneuvering room, not less.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
1209 points (100.0% liked)

politics

21885 readers
2826 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS