zog always wins

van hollen wasnt even intrested until the chatter from peers and constituents made him reconsider his bid for presidency. that itself refutes ur argument, so pivoting to this being about "not understanding" is rich

i already addressed the absolute defeatist thinking around needing and waiting 4 someones name to be in *circulation before they can even be considered fit for the role. implicitly drawing a line as if either pressley or warren arent as qualified simply bc of this and them not innately having the desire to fill these positions unlike the aforementioned bought-n-paid for opportunists is p narrow minded. also .. if u havent noticed bad 'policy' is the biggest part of what even granted dems a congress majority inna 1st place. warren being well versed in where the actual legislative vision and energy of the party/voters is going into 2028 would an asset, not a liability

hollen or schatz would only have an easier go of 'rallying across the isle and navigating party lines' simply on account of the fact that theyre all taking the same blood money

All this Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer s*** is doing is hurting the DNC because it's making more people realize that they really aren't for them.

It's just hilarious at my job when they wanna talk about Trump's "historically low approval ratings" whole time Jeffries and Schumer are at like 13% and 16% in their own districts in NY...and about mid-20% approval in their current speaker/leader roles.

You know how f***ing awful you gotta be at your job to have a lower approval rating than Donald Trump in 2025 AND 2026? How this s*** is even up for debate is mind-boggling to me.

They are out of touch with reality. They may could have gotten away with just going along with those dudes in previous election cycles, but now...the people are fed up.

If you live in Texas please call your local representative to make sure Greg abbot doesn't hold a special session to remove governor powers

Holy cope

Lol if they think so!
They better get ready for people to sit out next election if this is what they think

The Economist

Lmaoo if anything the republicans flipping had a bigger impact

What does this even mean, lol?

Bernie

The economist is known for their s***ty graphs it’s a meme at this point lol

Basically X axis is % that voted for Kamala in 24, Y-axis is % share vs expected. So upper left side are 2024 Trump voting areas where democrats performed better than expected. They’re supposedly concluding that moderates won in Trump territory and progressives won more in already left areas

That’s what people did the election before for precisely that reason and you all were doing nothing but punching left and saying they’re closet MAGA people lol

Trump a different story though
Because of his cult following

This is a graph of how the bullet hit JFK

Just cuz I think you sitting out was dumb as MAGA doesn’t mean democrats shouldn’t still learn from the experience

still useless lol

Smh one of those is my rep (Correa), bout to email his dumbass

Both sides argument already winning 😂😂

Pelosi was right in the f***ing building too wtf

It's so obvious what's going to happen in the next two years in just a week lol

Politician State Contributions through AIPAC PAC since 2022
Julia Brownley California $63,000
Lou Correa California $54,000
Laura Gillen New York $467,000
Steven Horsford Nevada $186,000
Jonathan Jackson Illinois $13,000
Nancy Pelosi California $15,000
Brittany Pettersen Colorado $72,000
Melanie Stansbury New Mexico $0
Haley Stevens Michigan $1,170,000
Marilyn Strickland Washington $291,000
Frederica Wilson Florida $33,000
Combined Approximately $2,364,000

Melanie Stansbury: Although she received $0 through AIPAC PAC, Track AIPAC's broader database lists approximately $57,000 associated with other pro-Israel PAC activity.

yup. damn near 98% of dems are taking pro-israel pacs this whole s*** is cooked

eh nothing gon really come from this until January anyways