this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2026
214 points (95.7% liked)

politics

31892 readers
2459 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 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.
  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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

• 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

on Thursday, Jeffries refused to saywhether he supported or opposed controversial efforts to integrate the US and Israeli militaries.

Jeffries also said this summer that he opposes Medicare for All, reversing his earlier position, and putting him at odds with a number of progressive Democrats who campaigned on the platform.

He’s been consistently hostile to the progressive faction of his party, refusing to endorse Mamdani for New York City mayor for months. And it was recently revealed that Jeffries met with Jared Kushner in private before the midterms

…Many progressives view Jeffries as an establishment figure who offers no hope for meaningful change and want someone less beholden to corporate interests to be speaker. Jeffries and some of his allies, meanwhile, have suggested that denying him the opportunity to become the first Black speaker in US history would be, to quote Bloomberg, “racially insensitive”.

…And we’ve seen this craven use of identity politics to smear progressive politics before, haven’t we? It’s the Bernie bros playbook all over again.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

I don't like Schummer he was already a majority leader and he showed that he is a bad leader.

I don't know how good is Jefferies, but I don't like him either especially after he thought meeting with Kushner was a good idea. Definitively not good optics meeting with a civilian who has no position in government and is close to the center of the corruption Democrats supposed to investigate.

Having said that we should express our concerns but not force then to choose specific people. The leader is there to make sure all Democrats act as a single block.

You are forgetting that there are still many non progressive Democrats and the tough pay will be to have them vote together. It is not an easy job, and someone who would be good needs to be great at internal politics and be liked or respected by their colleagues.

This is why Pelosi is considered as one of the best speakers, because every bill she brought for a vote, passed. She definitively wasn't progressive, but she helped push some progressive changes.

If we force them to choose someone who isn't working well with test of them we will get a democratic version of Mike Johnson. Unable to pass nearly anything despite Republicans holding both houses and best at shutting down the Congress.

On Senate we had Van Hollen expressing interest in the position and we had other senators voicing support for him. This is good.

Though in House there is no one who did that. I mean people try to bring Pressley but she didn't do it officially. I guess she started a petition, but that is going the wrong way, she should talk privately with her colleagues whether they would support her abd then express candidacy. Starting with a petition to people implies that maybe she doesn't get along well, and if that's true that might be a disaster.