1144
Petition to replace Hakeem Jeffries as Democrats’ House Speaker hits 500k signatures
(www.newsweek.com)
this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2026
1144 points (99.1% liked)
politics
31868 readers
2564 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I feel this is exactly why Sanders is perfect for the role, though.
The mere signal this would send to say that progressives are here to stay for the Democratic party would be massive alone.
That said I'm open to other suggestions, but the options are somewhat limited for experienced progressives who understand Senate rules and decorum and have relationships with much of the Senate.
He's 85. We wouldn't let an 85-year-old manage an Arby's. I love Bernie, but we gotta get off the gerontocracy.
But he's already a US Senator, repeatedly elected, and part of the most powerful chamber. The US Senate Majority Leader role is all about age and wisdom, frankly and little different than the duties he's already fulfilling effectively.
I can see this concern for the President, but in this case if the worst happens, Dems can just appoint someone else. It's Low Risk / High Reward.
The real question is: What can you point to that has shown his age with respect to cognition or position on current-events?
The second question: If not him, then who?
Pretty much everything he's ever said about the AI bubble. He's either drunk the fearmonger Kool Aid or some awful staffers. Either way, he's dropped the ball entirely, up to going on stage with Steve Fucking Bannon to talk about a sci-fi concept that has nothing to do with LLM tech or the real stakes of the bubble. It's been an awful show of face for him.
I take issue with the way one framed this. It feels disingenuous.
He did not go on stage "with" Steve Bannon; he had a speech on the same stage that Bannon gave a speech on at the same event, detailing mutual if not tangential concerns about AI and its effect son humanity. That seems completely different than seemingly trying to imply they're buddies or something.
Seems that while Bernie may be overextending the capacity for AI to be fluidly intelligent, I actually think he and his advisors are threading the needle very effectively in saying that, "Hey look, we know AI in some shape or form is likely here to stay. If it is, then it should be regulated, perhaps nationalized, and in the hands of public interests to be used for good -- like combating disinformation or pursing advancements in healthcare, etc."
Overall, across all issues, I think he and his team are pretty much on-point, and splitting hairs on AI is maybe a rare exception, not the norm -- and certainly not an indication of declining cognitive capacity or age. But again, since our options are limited to 100 US Senators and non-freshman generally, I'm very curious who one believes the better pick would be.
He's 85 years old. It's safe to assume cognitive decline. We let people retire at 67 without an exam, and we should be able to retire our legislators the same way.
We don't force them to retire at 67, though. There are a lot of morons in the world. I'd put Bernie at 10% decline against most people 40 years younger.
That said, I doubt he wants the job and I doubt the caucus as a whole would support an independent.
I just want to put it here, too:
Elizabeth Warren for Senate Majority Leader!