Chuck Shumer needs to stop attacking the woman who won 3M more votes.

[boston bean]

I am so tired of the guys, and I mean GUYS, chastising Hillary Rodham Clinton.

She took responsibility for her loss. She god damned said she was SORRY in her concession speech. I am not sure how much more responsibility one can take. It was almost the first fucking thing she said.

But to not allow her to speak (by criticizing her discussion of it and chastising her for discussing it) of Russia or Comey or any other thing that contributed to her loss, is just fucking insane and counterproductive.

Listen Chuck. Trump says Russia is a democratic ploy to place blame for the loss. Stop giving him ammunition for that POV. Thank you very much!

Damn, why does this have to be said.

LETS STOP STABBING OURSELVES.

[NCTraveler]

1. "She took responsibility for her loss."

Not good enough. Women have to beg for forgiveness.

Not sure why Shumer made the comments. He has contradicted his own words with comments about Russia, gerrymandering, and other voting issues.

[Orsino]

14. They will never stop, will they?

Now, if anyone knows how to roll with punches, it's Hillary Clinton. The tragedy of a Trump presidency, though, are going to leave people--generations of them, maybe--desperate to blame somebody, and it's going to be her...as she no doubt knew.

[JHan]

64. It's bizarre to me too: He handed Trump and the Republicans a gift.

[Thrill]

2. They never stick together like Republicans

Which is why they stay in the minority

[RKP5637]

55. Exactly!!! The democrats do not stick together and democratic messaging sucks. The

dem party needs new leadership, but yet the party mucks along bickering and fighting.

[Raastan]

3. K + R

[Docreed2003]

4. It really is amazingly frustrating...

I'm not quite sure what more Sec Clinton would need to do to "take responsibility" for the campaign. She's done it several times since Nov and, recently, she did so quite eloquently at the tech conference where she laid out exactly how the fine folks at Cambridge Analytica worked with the Trump campaign and with Russian interference to influence the election. And, oh by the way, everything she said about that interference is proving to be true!!

[boston bean]

8. Yeah, so what we are suppose to believe some lie it had no impact??? When it did??

Chuck is wrong all the way around.

[delisen]

51. Schumer is a nuts/bolts mind-not deep. No depth in

world affairs. Doesn't want to see connections he does not understand.

Turning a game of GO into checkers.

[Maven]

5. Yes I am a guy and I am goddamned sick and TIRED of it too.

Keep attacking Hillary, and see how far it gets us. Trump already used Schumer's statement in an attack tweet. WTF is he (Schumer) thinking???

[boston bean]

9. He did really!? I haven't seen it yet. I will have to check his twitter feed. I dread doing that!

[onit2day]

80. I'll never understand why Clinton picked Kane

when progressives were speaking loud and clear about progressive changes we got Kane instead. Clinton refused to accept all the baggage piled on her before she ever got the nomination. Perfectly qualified vs the mound of lies put on her. "You want Clinton sex slaves with your pizza?". Those that knew her were proud and confident but those who did not...whoa. Still, in this day and age all I gotta' say is lighten up with all the attack lines 'cause the motivations are innocent and attempting to be constructive. Stop assuming criticism means attack as we here can both criticize and support our elected leaders.

[Gabi Hayes]

6. Sorry for language, but what the fuck on

goddess' green earth Is WRONG with him

What an ASShole!

Bet his niece is super PO'd at him

[boston bean]

7. Other thing Gabi, is it is the fucking truth that it impacted the election.

Why does he want us to swallow a bag of shit that is is a lie.

Russia interference DID impact the election.

Chuck just undermined himself and democrats... dear god, will we ever learn!

[Gabi Hayes]

12. Absolutement, frere!

Last edited Mon Jul 24, 2017, 03:03 PM - Edit history (1)

If ever unity in the face of bald fascist overreach by these TRAITORS was necessary, nows the time

Words can't express my contempt for him

Am calling that chicken shit pipsqueaks office today, as soon as I get off my high horse!

[RKP5637]

58. The democratic party needs new leadership at the top, how much more obvious

can they get. Fuck I get fed up with it.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

10. Schumer didn't need to say this

Unforced error. Trump is imploding on his own for all of the world to see- because of the Russian investigation among other things. No sense in saying anything about him- or Hillary at this point.

[dalton99a]

33. +1

[delisen]

11. I don't recall him scolding or lecturing Kerry or Gore

[loyalsister]

20. He might have if they had tried to keep the election going

Remember that Democrats essentially wanted Bush vs. Gore to end and the Senate refused to challenge the electoral vote after the SC decision. It's over.

Why should she stand up only to confirm what her followers think when there are people with credibillity not compromised by the appearance of sour grapes, as well as institutional, and governmental power to do that work?

[loyalsister]

22. I also recall plenty of criticism of Gore and Kerry following the 2000 and 2004 elections

The Clinton victim party that has been going on since the 90s really should end, so that there is space for leadership that will determine our political future. We need to help support up and comers, as we should have been doing since 2000 rather than keeping the old guard on the stage and in power. That includes Schumer. I would like to see us soon have a majority leader who represents the future of the party.

[delisen]

43. Please post any public scolding by Schumer of Kerry or Gore

specifically referring to their recent election loss.

Your current post does not provide any example.

The old guard? do you mean Obama?

Indeed you should have been supporting "up and comers" -especially in states like Wisconsin. Of course some of those up and comers did lose a lot of elections from 2010 to 2014.

For some reason the Republican up and comers badly beat the Den up and comers--Scott Walker won a recall election even though he had a miserable record on jobs.

He had lots of help from private sector unions in his successful quest to destroy public service unions.

He never did provide the jobs but Scott Walker is looking forward to a third term--maybe because he provides a comfortable retro world view.

[loyalsister]

57. Schumer was not part of leadership at the time

My point is that this is nothing new. It is essentially a healthy tradition for the candidates who have lost to step back so that the party can move on.

Republicans have done a much better job of mentoring younger candidates. Look at who was in their 2016 presidential primary compared to ours. They had Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. Obviously both losers, but the Rs have been mentoring cold blooded fresh faces, like Scott Walker.
Our youngest candidate was shouted down by two candidates who are way past being able to personally continue to build on serious long term goals.

I have been supporting up and comers in my area. And, our strongest Democratic MO House representatives are in their early and mid 30s.

[Baconator]

68. The 'old guard' of the party has overstayed their welcome...

... and now any transition is being done through the lens of Trump.

We were on the right path with Obama and then literally jumped back to the 90s for some reason.

[delisen]

71. Facts please.

[Baconator]

74. Look at the results from 2016...

Look at who is in charge of the party right now and how long they have been at the top tiers of leadership.

We literally pushed a candidate who was best known during the 90s.

[delisen]

75. 2016 America was sleeping Clinton warned about the Russians

others hid the facts from us.

I like continuity. I haven't found relative youth to be a good qualifier for leadership. A mix is much better. I find Merkel to be highly competent.

What we need are women, not the same old stale male world view.

[Baconator]

76. That's just silly...

You need the best people... Male or female...

In any case, we don't have an age mix right now. We have people who have been on for years and decades and it shows.

It shows in the policy we put out, the way we do it, and in the election results.

[delisen]

77. I prefer a mix and experience-foreign policy

especially.

We have had overwhelming males and males for centuries, and it shows.

[geek tragedy]

24. I do.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2006/11/what_on_earth_d.html

For anyone who needed more evidence that Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) is out of favor with Democrats, it appeared that Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) kicked him out of the Democrats' leadership walk on Tuesday.

As the new Senate leaders departed from the Old Senate Chamber on their way to the Ohio Clock Corridor to talk about their agenda, the election of the leaders, and Iraq, John Kerry -- not a member of the new leadership -- walked out of the room behind new Majority Leader Harry Reid, Majority Whip Dick Durbin, Caucus Secretary Patty Murray and Caucus Vice-Chair Schumer. It is, after all, a public hallway in the Senate.

This reporter was standing with a scrum of journalists as Democrats left their caucus. It appeared that when Schumer noticed Kerry behind him, he turned around said something to Kerry.

We obviously don't know what Schumer said, but Kerry stopped in his tracks, watched the four Democratic leaders walk on without him, and when then he ducked between two of the marble statues in the hallway, which leads from the old Senate Chamber to the new Senate floor. Someone trying to project might say that Schumer had told Kerry to get the heck out of the leadership shot and Kerry, after digesting the request for a moment, did it.

Note also that Hillary kicked Kerry when he was down in 2006 re: "stuck in Iraq"

[seaglass]

32. That isn't Schumer saying something, that's a reporter making assumptions. Suprised you'd go with

this gossipy report as evidence.

[delisen]

36. Not. The surmised incident you posted is not a post-election

incident. It is 2 years after Kerry's loss and there is no public scolding- just a guess by a reporter about what was said in private.

[geek tragedy]

40. There was lots of piling on for Kerry after the "stuck in Iraq" flap.,

Clinton took the opportunity to kick him when he was down then.

It was probably smart politics for her to do so.

Just like it's smart politics for the DNC to start distancing itself from Clinton, who remains historically unpopular (fair or not, that's a fact).

[delisen]

48. We are talking about public blaming for election loss.

If you want to turn the conversation around to accuse Clinton of something else please post a specific example.

As for distancing ourselves from someone who is "historically unpopular" being smart politics-sounds like Trump who kicks all his associates to advance himself (all but Vladimir Putin to whom he remains enthralled).

Trump -light is not going to win us the immediate love of the confirmed Trump voter but they will have more respect for you(generic-not personal) if you are not so eager to dismiss, shame, shun, and destroy your candidates in order to curry their favor.

I am embarrassed for the Schumers, Hoyer, and other politicians trying so hard to avoid seeing the big picture while chopping the scary reality down to something they can manage to digest.

[karynnj]

42. You can throw in that the same Schumer/Clinton people were behind two other relatively nasty attacks

on Kerry.

1) The "hey, John" - attack which called on John Kerry to give the DSC - headed at the time by Schumer ALL the money he had left in his leadership PAC. This was after Kerry gave over a million to each the DSC, the DNC and the DCCC and he was using his email list and that money to solicit funds (via a link to that campaign's page) and support for many people running for House and Senate seats in 2006. He also was personally helping many of them with appearances. In addition, his PAC funded the recount for the Washington state governor and the the 2004 recount by Landrieu in LA. (I am very proud of being one of the many DU JK people who got the truth out on that one here and on DKOS. Incidentially, Schumer had nearly $10 million sitting in his own PAC that he was not using that year.

2) A nasty rumor campaign that Reid was angry that Kerry acted as if he were ONE of the Democratic leaders in the Senate. In fact, while he was the ranking member onn the Small Business Committee and not in the leadership, he was a respected figure among most of the Democrats in the Senate - especially as he ran a high road campaign that actually exceeded what could have been expected given Bush's approval rating (higher than Obama 2012) , the state or the economy and the fact that people were still tramatised by 911.

There were two things that may have been easier for Kerry than Clinton.

The first was he did have his Senate seat to return to. It has to be jarring being part of two years of an intense campaign - working probably about 16 hours a day, spending each day describing what you will being doing as President, where with each reiteration, it likely becomes almost more tangible .... then the loss and all is quiet. Even going back to the Senate - not President -- has to hard -- even when many peers were sympathetic. With Kerry, I recall that Harkin, inconspicuously put an arm around Kerry while they listened to Bush's speech and Dick Lugar kindly telling him how proud he was - even as a Republican - of Kerry's competence on foreign policy at the first debate. Both Romney and Clinton went from "the next President" to two very prominent people with many possible choices, but no real job.

The second is that it was far more likely that Kerry, age 61 when he lost, would have many chances to do big things. He had not ruled out running in 2008, but it was immediately clear that most powers that be in the party did not want that. This could also have been by remaining a Senator - as Kennedy did. He was young enough, healthy enough, and likely a Senator from MA as long as he wanted to be. He quietly had many accomplishments from that poistion and once he became chaair of the Foreign Relations committee, he had even more significant accomplishments. As it was, he became a Secretary of State who was essential to both the Paris Accord, that even with trump's action, is the biggest step forward against climate change and the Iran nuclear deal that until this point avoided what was an imminent war.

Clinton, age 69, may well create a platform outside of government to address issues that she has fought for her whole life. It is also possible that if the Democrats win the Presidency in 2010, she could be given a cabinet position. Like Kerry, she might put her toe in the water to see about running for President again, but I suspect the water might be even icier than the water in 2005 for Kerry! I suspect that she will have a steeper climb to getting another chapter than Kerry did.



Beyond

[geek tragedy]

44. The Senate seat is a big distinction.

If we look at the past general election losers:

2012--Rmoney--no elected office--disappeared from the public stage
2008: McCain--still a Senator--maintained a public profile
2004: John Kerry--still a Senator--maintained a public profile and eventually became an excellent Secretary of State
2000: Al Gore--no elected office--threw himself into advocacy re: a single issue (climate change)
1996: Bob Dole--no Senate seat to fall back into (had resigned)--started cutting Viagra ads
1992 George HW Bush--no elected office--removed himself from the national stage.

Part of Clinton's current unpopularity is that the country still hasn't moved on from the 2016 election and we're still talking about her.

[delisen]

49. Part of her "unpopularity" is that many Dems

are not in favor of her seeming retreat from a public role. they would like to see more of her and hear more-but I believe she is doing the right thing.

The Republicans would love to change the conversation to Clinton and would eagerly do so if she were too public now.

[karynnj]

60. Agree and would add that more than any other loss on either side, it was a shock

I went back today and looked at the various national polls in 2016 at polling report.com and now see that we really were rather too confident that she would win easily. Part of this was that she actually led in the various aggregate polls and models. However, the polls at the end showing her 2 or 3 points a ahead are actually consistent with getting 3 million more votes while losing the electoral college. Viewing earlier polls and seeing when she was more than 3 points ahead, shows that in the last month things bounced back and forth.

I think the country is reacting to the horror and shock that Trump actually became President and is now running through the government like some malevolent King Kong knocking over everything and trashing the place. In addition, I think he knows what he is doing continuing to tweet about Clinton, It gives him a needed foil and sometimes revive all the negative themes of a campaign many of really want to forget.

[Orsino]

13. Clinton cannot "take responsibility" for the loss, nor should she have to.

The lethal consequences of a Trump presidency are going to fal on others.

Unless she feels like underlining certain things she didn't do well enough, or unless she want to throw her campaigners under the bus, the blame goes to those who didn't vote for her, and to those of us who didn't do enough to boost her.

I think she did a great job, mostly.

[FreepFryer]

15. Democrats' best political hope is not to attack other Democrats... Love to Schumer, Clinton, Pelosi!

...

[Ligyron]

29. Right and def not in public.

[TeamPooka]

16. Hillary Clinton owes no one an apology. Period.

[still_one]

21. you are absolutely right. President Obama and Hillary deserve an apology from the American people

a few weeks ago The NY Times had a front page article blaming the "hubris" of President Obama and the Democrats as the reason the republicans are against the Paris Accords. It is this false equivalency that permeates everything, and instead of reporting the facts, actually distorts and misrepresents the facts, while falsely believing this demonstrates their objectivity

[BumRushDaShow]

17. Jealousy, ego-tripping, and some bad blood

That sums up Schumer.

https://apnews.com/6a0dfa2f5b144a4cb329e67a6579d0dc/clinton-schumer-eye-new-political-partnership-2017

The requisite signs of a consummate "politician".

[still_one]

18. Not sure what Schumer said, but Hillary has nothing to apologize for. The double standard, false

equivalency coverage of our illustrious media, who go out of their way with their false eqivalencies, thinking it will give them the appearance of objectivity, when in fact it does just the opposite

Hillary was was ahead in the polls when 11 days before the election, Comey sent the lettter to the republicans in congress, and the media, including MSNBC then proceeded to parade every right wing politician across the screen telling us how the 'email investigation was being reopened". That was a lie, but it didn't stop the press, and The NY Times was right up in front propagating that lie

It was no coincidence that the lead Hillary had was completely erased, and Nate Silver leaves no doubt that event was the catalyst

Of course there was other interfering factors also which contributed to deliberately planting false stories and lies, along with Russian involvement in that

and last but not least there were those self-identified progressives who refused to vote for Hillary because the believed the bullshit that there was no difference between republicans and Democrats

Every Democrat running for Senate in those critical swing states lost to the incumbent, establishment, republican, and most of those Democrats were quite progressive

Well this country made its f**king bed, and now they are going to have to sleep in it because it is highly doubtful impeachment will occur, and if it did, those next in line are just as bad or worse

and to those 47% who couldn't be bothered to vote, they are ultimately where the blame lies. women's rights, labor rights, civil rights, social security, medicare, healthcare, and the environment are now in serious jeopardy because of their actions

[StevieM]

31. Comey's actions were not just wrong, they were illegitimate. What happened in the final days

of the race completely overhauled the election. Now the media acts like it was no big deal.

[still_one]

63. Exactly Stevie

[delisen]

72. Strong women often unpopular with weak men and women

However we are not going to progress without strong women-so maybe it is time for some on the left to come to terms with strong women.

Equality is challenging.

[Podkayne K]

19. Who's at Fault?

Just who was it that didn't stop well known Clinton Hunter and hyper partisan from becoming FBI Director?
Just who was it that knew about Russia meddling in our election and did nothing to stop it?
Just who is it to not blame the true culprit? You know, the one that looks back at them in the mirror (Assuming there is an image of anyone at all when they look into a mirror.

Schumer sounds exactly like his repuke counterparts. When all else fails, BLAME THE WOMEN!

[StevieM]

25. I don't blame Obama for Comey's criminal behavior but appointing him as FBI director was the worst

mistake Obama ever made.

[DefenseLawyer]

23. Clinton's campaign is over.

I recall many of us criticized Al Gore for being too cautious, choosing Lieberman, etc., while still acknowledging that he was cheated out of the Presidency. At some point, as time passes she has to seen as a former candidate, albeit one that was treated very unfairly when she ran. Whether anyone wants to praise her or attack her at this point is to comment on history. I'm focused on the future and she's not in it, whether you can accept that or not.

[comradebillyboy]

27. It would be nice if Schumer adopted your view instead of

attacking Hillary for no good reason.

[KPN]

26. Pooh. Schumer did not blast Hillary.

At least not in anything I've seen/heard.

The media may be spinning it that way, but Schumer did not say anything like that.

How about we develop some skin and accept some (not all but some) responsibility.

The Democratic Party let labor down beginning years ago. Let's be realistic and accept this.

[HDavis]

28. Chuck Schumer needs to stop attacking the woman who won 3M more votes

Thumbs up, boston bean -- I agree 100%!

[panader0]

30. I've been gone for a few days. What is Shumer's quote?

[Jim Lane]

82. No one has answered you, because righteous indignation is more fun than facts

Unless there's some Schumer statement that I haven't seen, here's what happened:

Some Democratic leaders decided that, along with "We're not Trump," it would be useful for the party to have a short statement of positive goals. (This is hardly a controversial idea.) The Washington Post wrote about the plan in this story: "Trump had ‘The Art of the Deal.’ Now Democrats say their economic agenda is ‘A Better Deal.’" The Post's reporting included this passage:

The rollout comes as Democrats continue to struggle to sell a coherent message to voters. In a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, 37 percent of Americans said that the party “currently stands for something,” while 52 percent said it “just stands against Trump.” The same poll found that Trump’s overall approval rating has deteriorated to 36 percent — making him the most unpopular president of the modern era at this point in his presidency.

Those findings resonate with party leaders who are still stunned by Trump’s come-from-behind victory last year.

“When you lose to somebody who has 40 percent popularity, you don’t blame other things — Comey, Russia — you blame yourself,” Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in an interview previewing the new plan. “So what did we do wrong? People didn’t know what we stood for, just that we were against Trump. And still believe that.”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) agreed, explaining in a separate interview that the new focus “is not a course correction, but it’s a presentation correction.”

You'll note that Schumer didn't even mention Clinton. You'll note further that he identified the issue as "what did we do wrong" (emphasis added).

Slate, however, decided that a misleading let's-you-and-her-fight headline might get some clicks, and reported this development as "Schumer Takes Aim at Clinton: Don’t Blame Russia or Comey, 'Blame Yourself'".

Pretty clever, huh? The verbatim quotation from Schumer is juxtaposed with something he didn't say to give a totally false impression.

As reprehensible as that is, however, the DU community isn't without its own issues when it comes to intellectual integrity. When the Slate piece became the subject of this thread, it was quickly pointed out -- beginning with uponit7771 just 17 minutes later and reiterated by others -- that Schumer hadn't said it and that the whole thing was a hit piece by Slate. Unfortunately, the thread we're now in went roaring off in total disregard of the truth. Apparently, getting to denounce misogyny directed at Hillary Clinton is too juicy a chance to pass up, and facts be damned.

There actually has been plenty of misogyny directed at Hillary Clinton, but, to paraphrase Paul Samuelson, DU posts have denounced nine of the last five such instances.

[Sunlei]

34. LETS STOP STABBING OURSELVES.

[seaglass]

35. I would really like to know what purpose Schumer's comments served. He has pissed off a lot of

Hillary voters - not good for him. He looks like a bumbling fool.

[SeloverB]

37. Dems need to move on!

Please STOP with all the perseverating about Hillary! The Dems need to move on beyond the Clintons. Time for some new blood to take over. Bernie proved that the Dems can move to the left. In fact he moved Hillary to the left. Please let ANYONE who can speak for progressives do so, without all the knashing of teeth over Hillary. I supported Hillary, AFTER Bernie had done all he could. Now I want to find the next progressive that can carry the progressive torch. Hillary can and should remain in the background of Dem politics. She's had a GREAT run. Let her, and the rest of us move on!

[vi5]

38. "attacking"

I do not think that word means what you think it means.

Plus, I thought one of her biggest selling points was her resilience and that "She's a fighter" and "She can withstand anything that's thrown her way!!" or "She's held up in the face of decades of attacks and smears!!!"

But now all of a sudden she's a delicate flower?

[niyad]

47. and the russians, and voter suppression, had absolutely NOTHING to do with it, yes?????

[murielm99]

62. Sanders was not marginalized.

Is anyone telling him to shut up? If Hillary needs to shut up, then so does Bernie.

Why are you refighting the primary?

And Bernie was given a role by Democrats after his loss. What is he doing with it? Criticizing Democrats. P.S.: He is doing this AFTER the primary.

I'm still with her.

[Gothmog]

65. Great post

[Jamaal510]

70. +1

[brer cat]

81. +1

Exactly.

[LenaBaby61]

66. NO Dem ...

Was going to beat the type of voter-suppression & ruskie meddling that Hillary Clinton had to face. Not to mention that stupid, unnecessary email "spasm" that Comey had a few days before the election

This election was never winnable for ANY Dem. Bernie would have faced the SAME voter-suppression/purging/ruskie meddling, plus there is STILL talk of that 3 inch dossier that Nazi Leninist, de-constructor of this country Bannon "allegedly" has on him if he decides to runs for POTUS in 2020, and we know that Dems are horrible at fighting back against thuglicans dirty tricks

But back to the subject at hand:

Crosscheck Removed 450K Voters in MI, 270 K in AZ and 590 K in NC.

Crosscheck in action: Trump victory margin in Michigan: 13,107 Michigan Crosscheck purge list: 449,922

Trump victory margin in Arizona: 85,257 Arizona Crosscheck purge list: 270,824

Trump victory margin in North Carolina: 177,008 North Carolina Crosscheck purge list: 589,393

On Tuesday, we saw Crosscheck elect a Republican Senate and as President, Donald Trump. The electoral putsch was aided by nine other methods of attacking the right to vote of Black, Latino and Asian-American voters, methods detailed in my book and film, including “Caging,” “purging,” blocking legitimate registrations, and wrongly shunting millions to “provisional” ballots that will never be counted.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/11/14/1599330/-Crosscheck-Removed-450K-Voters-in-MI-270-K-in-AZ-and-590-K-in-NC

tRumputin barely won the 3 states (PA., WI., MI.) he HAD to win by only a few thousand votes (About 77,000) which installed him into the presidency. He was losing those 3 states the day before November 8th, but magically he came from behind to win those 3 states--barely at the last minute. And who knows what really happened to Dems in Ohio & Florida, two states where Dem votes probably haven't been counted fairly or counted at ALL on a constant basis since 2004 and 2000 respectively.

Finally, we know that newer and more anti-Dem voter ID laws, Dem vote-purging, crosscheck will be very alive, well and completely OFF THE CHAIN in the 2018 and 2020 elections, and that the ruskies (Who never stopped meddling per Clint Watts, Comey et al) will be just as engaged if not more in 2018/2020 and using different tactics to effect our elections that will KEEP thuglicans in office for their own gain and to further erode our Democracy. Our putin-installed, treasonous president along with his Department of Homeland in-Security doesn't give two dead flies about ruskie-meddling or about stopping any form of voter-suppression as it's used AGAINST Dems. I won't bother mentioning what racist, Keebler Elf beauguard could do to stop Dems (Minorities) from voting in 2018/2020, but he'll be LONG gone before our elections start in 2018/2020.

I'm not sure what Dems CAN do to stop ruskie meddling or GOP voter-suppression leading into 2018, as thuglicans/putin control the White House, and as the GOP control vote collections and vote tallying all across this country in a voting system where all of our voting apparatus is compromised, old, hackable etc.

[BeyondGeography]

41. Can we all at least start spelling our Senate Leader's name correctly?

You know, being Democrats and all.

[samnsara]

45. i didnt watch her speech... i was too sad for myself but sad especially for her...

[niyad]

46. unfortunately, misogyny is an ugly concept not strictly limited to the reichwingnuts.

[flying-skeleton]

50. SHUT UP ALREADY CHUCK !!

[RKP5637]

52. Looks like Chuck Shumer wants more republican wins. Tearing at your own party is not very

impressive. It brings the whole party down and plays into the hands of the republicans. I still say the democratic party needs a fresh lineup of players at the top.

[trueblue2007]

53. the dems can not be women haters!! We make up more voters than any other group.

[Baconator]

69. I don't think he believes that no woman could do it...

Just not Hillary...

[elehhhhna]

54. He's a jerk and his niece isn't funny

[oasis]

56. Take a hike Chuck. ImWithHer.

[Omaha Steve]

59. Chuck Schumer endorses Hillary Clinton for president: If you run, youll win (11-3-13)

Seems he picked her long before others did.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2013/11/02/chuck-schumer-endorses-hillary-clinton-for-president-if-you-run-youll-win/

By Ed O'Keefe November 3, 2013
Updated 10:40 a.m. Sunday

Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Saturday became the most senior Democratic lawmaker yet to call on Hillary Rodham Clinton to run for president in 2016, calling her the best-prepared to "vanquish" tea party Republicans in the next election.

Election Day 2016 is still more than three years away, and Clinton isn't expected to make a final decision on whether to run for president until next year. But that didn't stop Schumer, the third-ranking Senate Democrat, from using a rare visit to Iowa to do some early campaigning on behalf of his former Senate colleague from New York. "I am urging Hillary Clinton to run for president, and when she does, she will have my full and unwavering support," he said Saturday evening during a keynote address to an Iowa Democratic Party fundraiser in Des Moines.

"Run, Hillary, Run," Schumer's prepared remarks said. "If you run, you’ll win, and we’ll all win."

Schumer went on to say: "With a strong platform and with Hillary leading the charge, we will vanquish the Ted Cruz, Tea Party Republicans in 2016 and create a generation of Democrats who will make sure the middle class gets what it needs, our country advances and the torch held by that beautiful lady in New York’s harbor burns more brightly than ever."

FULL story at link.

[SHRED]

61. Democratic leadership should never...

...criticize our party in public.

It feeds the RW and creates strife in our ranks.
THAT IS ALL IT DOES!!

[Baconator]

67. Chuck Schumer is right...

[delisen]

73. ...wing on a few issues.

[OKNancy]

78. Here Chuck, use this for your "new" Democratic message

&feature=youtu.be

[zentrum]

79. No, he doesn't.

He's the Party Leader. Experienced. He knows what he's doing. I'm glad he's doing what needs to be done in this crisis.