J

to be blunt, I think this common self-contradictory combination is a convenient excuse for people to let themselves and their own social circles off the hook, indulge in endlessly critiquing power, and never do anything to make things better

to be clear, I agree with (1), that many elected Dems are not fighting hard enough.

I just don't see how you can possibly think that, and also not do your part as a voter to change it (2), and also give literal Trump supporters a pass (3).

These 3 positions are somehow simultaneously held by millions of people:

1. Democrats don't fight hard enough against Republicans (true), so I hate them

2. But I can't be assed to vote in primaries

3. And btw my own friends and family members who actively vote for and support Republicans are fine

Dems are very proud of themselves for their “savvy” willingness to tell their base to simmer down and let the experts work. What they don’t seem to understand is the intangible, but very real, damage that does to the enthusiasm of their voters, who feel abandoned. And then the “experts” fail!

yeah, Oregon has two very solid senators!

We deserve so much more.

I think tonight shows why “moderate to win elections” is a real risk

the big divide in the Dem caucus, as many have noted, has been less moderate vs progressive than fight versus don’t fight

but it’s not a coincidence that basically everyone in the “don’t fight” camp is a moderate

I'll never understand why "progressives in primaries" and "any and all Dem nominees to stop GOP in general elections" and seem to have so little overlap among online lefty posters. consistent progressive principles demand them both.

remember we are in a big coalition.

correct. please keep the primary vs. general distinction clear.

absolutely nothing justifies letting republicans win. republicans are the ones we're furious they're surrendering to. remember?

*primaries* are where you get the chance as a voter to push for someone who will truly fight.

I see a lot of folks saying this will hurt Dems in the midterms and frankly I’m not sure that’s true - if anything, it shows the depth to which people are angry and engaged and wanting to fight these assholes

but it does substantially increase the chance they will be voting for different Democrats

I think bluesky is kidding itself if it thinks Janet Mills would not have contributed to tonight's surrender if she were in the Senate.

Silver lining is Mike Johnson has to come up with new reasons not to release the Epstein files

I loathe "rotating villain theory." Always struck me as the sort of the thing that bad-faith wrecker doomers would peddle to try to demoralize the left.

It looks impossible to refute tonight.

Shame on everyone involved in orchestrating this. I'm furious beyond words.

same. there is only a very short list of US senators I baseline trust at this point.

Van Hollen, Warren, Sanders, Smith (retiring), Merkley, Hirono. Idk, hard to say beyond a handful.

It's hard to avoid the grim conclusion that any of the other 41 may be complicit in this constant surrendering.

My actual position is that this is a fascist occupied government and giving them more money, at least without actionable restraints on their power, should not happen.

I understand that this is an extreme position. But I was hoping the Democrats would at least eke out a small victory.

For what it's worth, I do basically agree that even pretty good Dem Senators (e.g. Booker) should face a strong primary challenge

Some of them may end up deserving to win those primaries! But they should still have to face them

Any D running for Senate in 2026 must vow to oust Schumer as leader. Maybe he would quit

a note on the Minnesota primary: this is correct, the person to replace Tina Smith with is Peggy Flanagan

Warner is up for reelection. He was widely seen driving towards surrender behind the scenes, but he's voting no in public because it's unpopular. The real question is whether he supports a senate leadership change. If not, someone who supports senate leadership change should primary him.

Unless Democratic Senators who voted no on the #Schumersurrender today explicitly call for Schumer to resign or step aside - they all own this cave. Just pushing out performative posts and press releases don’t count for much anymore. Enough.

not to be a shit stirrer but have Janet Mills and Graham Platner said anything about this Senate vote?

In March, after Schumer last surrendered, we called an emergency meeting of Indivisible leaders. 92% told us to call on him to step down from leadership (which we did).

In a poll over this weekend, 98.67% said we should keep up the fight.

Rank & file Dems are going to be PISSED!

Replace Smith with Peggy Flanagan. Do not replace her with Angie Craig.

replace Peters with Abdul El-Sayed. Do not replace him with Haley Stevens.

Schumer voting no to try to save personal face, but letting his caucus vote yes, is such a cowardly weaselly move. Echoes of his obvious cowardice on Tuesday, refusing to say who he voted for in NYC mayoral election.

If Schumer wanted to stop this he could have stopped it. Obviously!

HE MUST GO.

My family has been without half our income for 40 days. It has been.. very hard.

We are willing to feel that pain so people can have health care next year, or to undo these illegal recissions.

We are not willing to have been put through this for NOTHING.

Two clear tests for any and all US Senate candidates in Dem primaries next year:

1. Will you vote to oust Schumer as leader?
2. Will you vote to end the filibuster?

If you're not a clear yes on both of those, I'm going to have a very hard time trusting you with my primary vote.

exactly. open primaries are also opportunities.

Peters is resigning in MI. I would want to primary him if he was running. But at least by resigning, he makes it easy to elect a fighter to replace him (El-Sayed is my preference) and not more of the same (e.g. Stevens).

Yes, yes, yes. If they think they can stop the fury of this betrayal from fueling 2026 primary challenges, they have another think coming.

*Open* primaries in 2026 are also going to be an essential battleground. Minnesota, Michigan. Schumer-backed candidates need to lose these races.

okay, so, with Dems successfully keeping anyone up in 2026 for voting for this turd let's take a look at who's up in 2026 anyway:

1. Cory Booker - apparently involved behind the scenes, constantly looking for bipartisanship. I don't dislike him personally but he doesn't have what we need. Primary.