But it’s been about six months since Schumer decided that it wasn’t the time for a fight, that neither he nor the country was ready. Democratic leaders have had six months to come up with a plan. If there’s a better plan than a shutdown, great. But if the plan is still nothing, then Democrats need new leaders.
We already know the Democrats need new leaders. Or more precisely, they need leaders, period.
Schumer and Jeffries aren’t leaders - they’re high-ranking tools.
That’s what they’ve demonstrated with their treatment of Mamdani. They hold the positions they hold because they have no principles and no integrity - because they’re owned by the donors and can be counted on to serve the interests of the donors regardless of any other considerations.
And for the time being at least, the donors - even the most generally leftist of them - aren’t sufficiently opposed to what Trump is doing. They’d probably rather the tyrants have [D]s after their names than [R]s, and they’re undoubtedly personally offended by Trump, since he’s petulant and gauche and gross, but they don’t have any particular opposition really to a program to benefit the wealthy few (which necessarily includes themselves) at the expense of the common people (which is just a bunch of shabby people they don’t know), so while they’d certainly welcome efforts to make Trump look bad, they’re not really committed to stopping him. And I guarantee that some significant number of them are already daydreaming about what they’ll be able to do if/when the power that Trump has accumulated falls into the hands of a Democrat.
And again - Schumer and Jeffries are their tools. We already see that with their refusal to support Mamdani.
And I have little doubt that we’ll continue to see it in their failure to meaningfully oppose Trump.
We already know the Democrats need new leaders. Or more precisely, they need leaders, period.
Schumer and Jeffries aren’t leaders - they’re high-ranking tools.
That’s what they’ve demonstrated with their treatment of Mamdani. They hold the positions they hold because they have no principles and no integrity - because they’re owned by the donors and can be counted on to serve the interests of the donors regardless of any other considerations.
And for the time being at least, the donors - even the most generally leftist of them - aren’t sufficiently opposed to what Trump is doing. They’d probably rather the tyrants have [D]s after their names than [R]s, and they’re undoubtedly personally offended by Trump, since he’s petulant and gauche and gross, but they don’t have any particular opposition really to a program to benefit the wealthy few (which necessarily includes themselves) at the expense of the common people (which is just a bunch of shabby people they don’t know), so while they’d certainly welcome efforts to make Trump look bad, they’re not really committed to stopping him. And I guarantee that some significant number of them are already daydreaming about what they’ll be able to do if/when the power that Trump has accumulated falls into the hands of a Democrat.
And again - Schumer and Jeffries are their tools. We already see that with their refusal to support Mamdani.
And I have little doubt that we’ll continue to see it in their failure to meaningfully oppose Trump.