Where is Schumer?

[boston bean]

What is he doing to reign in the Manchus/ Sinema and the like?

[FBaggins]

1. Like what?

Beat them with a wet noodle?

[boston bean]

2. Well we expect Pelosi to make things happen. Why not Chuck?

[FBaggins]

7. I don't expect Pelosi to squeeze wine from a stone

And, while both are the heads of their respective chambers, their actual powers are quite different. Not just structurally (Speaker is a constitutional role), but strategically (one vote change removes any power we might imagine for Schumer).

[Blue_Adept]

3. Well, we see him going about a lot to different meetings and applying pressure

He's on the senate floor a lot - there's tons of video every day - pushing the larger package because everything isn't about just those other two senators.

And a lot of things don't happen on camera.

Unless we put bodycams on them, cause that'll make 'em honest.

[boston bean]

4. I have not seen him on TV. I have seen Pelosi.

Maybe it’s the media or I just have not seen it.

[Blue_Adept]

6. It's the old saying, just because you don't see it doesn't mean it's not happening

I've usually got MSNBC on during the day and he's regularly on TV in clips showing what he's doing or being interviewed on the network itself.

I mean, it's not like he's off playing checkers or something in the park. Both he and Pelosi have kept things running tight for the past 2-3 years in their respective places.

Pelosi gets the callouts because we've got a lot of stupid men that just want to pin blame on her for everything.

[pwb]

22. Read a newspaper? He is busy and doing well.

The T V Media is against us so fuck them.

[boston bean]

25. I read as well thank you very much.

[Tomconroy]

5. He's been busy leading the charge to get rid of the limit

On the SALT tax deduction.

[Celerity]

9. A full repeal of the limit (as advocated for by Gottheimer and other 'moderates') is simply another

giveaway to the extremely wealthy. I agree the limit is too low, I have zero issues with raising it upward, but in no way should it be completely uncapped.

[dsp3000]

30. What's the limit though? It hurts people who live in expensive areas.

There are alot of nicer areas - not filthy rich areas, areas where families are raised, where taxes are through the roof. south jersey has a lot of these towns.

[Celerity]

34. Raise it up so that people up to a certain point of wealth are not impacted, but keep it

in place for all those above.

I am sure they can find a proper and fair cut off point.

[Scrivener7]

8. Good question. Though, apparently, you have offended some by asking.

[boston bean]

10. Yep. It is par for the course.

What is he doing about Manchin and Sinema?

We are constantly hearing about And from Nancy regarding her caucus.

The double standard is glaring!

[Scrivener7]

11. I personally love Schumer. He's my Senator and I will always vote for him, but

we need another majority leader. Schumer is a lovely man, a gentleman, a good legislator. But for leader, we need a pit bull.

Like Nancy.

[FBaggins]

13. So... what would a pit bull do instead?

And how many such are there in the Senate?

[Scrivener7]

19. Go LBJ dirty and twist arms.

Do you believe there is nothing in Manchins past that could be leveraged against him?

[FBaggins]

23. That's just another way of saying "be a pit bull" and doesn't answer the question

Do you believe there is nothing in Manchins past that could be leveraged against him?

I believe that Manchin has more leverage than Schumer.

So Schumer finds some skeleton in Manchin's closet. He's been having an affair with two separate alien species? Manchin is forced to resign and Schumer immediately becomes minority leader. Schumer takes away Manchin's chairmanship of the energy committee? McConnel gives it right back to him.

[Scrivener7]

28. That's the best you can imagine?

Did Lindsay resign when his past was leveraged? Or did he become useful to those who leveraged him?

[FBaggins]

31. Why not imagine something else entirely since we're making stuff up?

Maybe he's remote controlled by an iPad in Russia somewhere and Schumer just has to send 007 in to retrieve the device so that he can take control?

If you get an idea beyond running around in circles screaming that "somebody has to be able to do something!" - you be sure to let the rest of us know.

[Scrivener7]

32. What I am describing is a far cry from your characterization, and you know that perfectly well.

And what I am describing is also nothing new in politics. And you know THAT perfectly well too.

And what I am describing is used by the other side, often quite visibly, all the time, as exemplified in the case of Lindsay Graham.

It used to be used occasionally by our side, as is very well documented about LBJ. It is a tool we need to use against Manchin and Sinema.

[Calista241]

33. LBJ twisted arms by handing out, removing, and playing with the value of earmarks.

A weapon that is not in Schumer’s bag. Blame Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton for that.

Outside of that, West Virginia doesn’t have any large military bases that can be closed, they don’t have large government support contractors that can be threatened. What’s Schumer supposed to do?

[Scrivener7]

38. And yet, somehow, the other side manages to bring recalcitrant members to heel.

Like Lindsay Graham, for example.

Gosh. I wonder how they did that.... no I don't. I bet we're both pretty clear on how they did that.

[Calista241]

40. John McCain single handedly bucked his party and saved the ACA.

And Republicans could and did do nothing about it. Except bitch on twitter obviously.

[boston bean]

68. First time in my lifetime I had seen a Republican do something noble.

[onenote]

16. It's not as if Pelosi is having much success either

She's announced plans to vote on the first infrastructure bill but she can't convince enough members of the progressive caucus to go along with that plan.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

20. We would be in the same situation regardless of who the Majority leader is

The Senate is tied 50-50. There is little leverage with either of them. Best you can do is talk and negotiate with them, which I am sure Schumer is doing. We don't have the numbers in the Senate to strong arm either of them like publicly attacking them, stripping them of their committee chairs, or kicking them totally off their committees and isolating them. If you push Manchin or Sinema enough, either could go indie and caucus with the GOP, which would hand control of the Senate back to McConnell.

[True Blue American]

12. Negotiating.

Schumer does not have to have his face on TV all the time. He does hold PR’s or talk on the Senate floor.

[StarfishSaver]

21. Thank you

There's much more to being Leader than being on television. In fact, that's a distraction since most of the job is done on the inside out of public view.

[True Blue American]

45. We have enough

Going on every TV show that will have them.

[gojoe12]

14. I heard

There’s a third senator not on board but I can’t find out who or even if it’s true

[NurseJackie]

15. Oh, I guess he's just sitting in his office playing sudoku puzzles...

Where is Schumer?

Oh, I guess he's just sitting in his office playing sudoku puzzles... and Microsoft Solitaire.

What is he doing to reign in the Manchus/ Sinema and the like?

I don't know that there's an simple answer to this question. If there were one, I believe he would have done it already. What are people suggesting that he do that would be possible and effective? Is there a single solution that has escaped him?

[betsuni]

17. Eating eliitist canapes.

[NurseJackie]

18. ...

[StarfishSaver]

24. ...

Where is Schumer? Why isn't he reining them in?

What exactly do you think he should do that he's not doing?

How am I supposed to know?

[boston bean]

26. I know what Pelosi is doing.

[Scrivener7]

29. This need on DU lately to ridicule and pile on people who ask

valid questions is very disturbing.

[NurseJackie]

35. Valid question my ass. It was a clear insinuation that Schumer is "missing in action" or ...

This need on DU lately to ridicule and pile on people who ask
valid questions is very disturbing.

Valid question my ass. It was a clear insinuation that Schumer is "missing in action" or ... that he's lazy and doing-nothing. Or that he doesn't care, or that he *could* do something, but that he *chooses* to do nothing.

These types of "why doesn't he DO anything" questions also assume that Schumer has an obligation to live-stream every phone-call, conference, and meeting... and that everyone is entitled to have real time access every email that he sends/receives... so that the impatient naysayers and cynics among us will be (at long last) convinced that he's actually doing his job (instead of twiddling his thumbs and watching his philodendron grow.)

What's actually disturbing are the absurd questions that are intended to insult and diminish Democratic leadership by insinuating that they're weak, lazy or incompetent.

[Scrivener7]

36. Case in point.

[NurseJackie]

39. Wrong.

Case in point.

Wrong. There must first be evidence of an actual "valid question" before any sort of "case" can be argued. All I'm trying to point out is that it serves no good purpose for anyone to make these passive-aggressive backhanded smears against Democratic leadership and then try to pretend to be "victims" of a pile-on when they're rightfully called-out on it.

[Scrivener7]

41. The question "Where is Schumer?" hardly earns the hysteria that has greeted it in this thread.

You'd think she had shot his dog.

And PS, none of those piling on, saying, "HOW DARE YOU ASK THAT????" has been able to say a word about what he is doing. There's been a lot of ridicule and a lot of people characterizing that very simple question as a vile attack, but no one has said a word about anything he has done.

A simple "I don't know" in answer to the question would have been more honest. The scolding and insults are way out of proportion. They indicate to me that there are some unfaced fears working here.

[NurseJackie]

43. That's a very imaginative dodge.

You'd think she had shot his dog.

No, nobody thought that. The meaning and intent were clear. Although that's a very imaginative dodge... but it's simply not believable. It does little to hide or justify the obvious hostility.

And PS, none of those piling on, saying, "HOW DARE YOU ASK THAT????" has been able to say a word about what he is doing.

Irrelevant.

There's been a lot of ridicule and a lot of people characterizing that very simple question as a vile attack, but no one has said a word about anything he has done.

Also irrelevant for obvious reasons that I addressed in an earlier reply.

A simple "I don't know" in answer to the question would have been more honest.

So, what you're insinuating here is that those of us who object to the passive aggressive denigration of our party's leaders are being dishonest? Seriously? --- What good purpose does it serve to humor anyone by pretending that this type of "concern" and smear is legitimate and valid? No! Absolutely not. That's totally ridiculous.

The scolding and insults are way out of proportion.

Actually, the responses have been measured and reasonable. Nobody is being insulted. There have been no insults from me or from any of the other responses I've read so far in this thread.

They indicate to me that there are some unfaced fears working here.

Unfaced fears? Oh, please! So now loyal Democrats are being subjected to this psychoanalyzing claptrap? GMAFB!

[Scrivener7]

51. Lol. Come on, Jackie. The recent spate of "NEVER POSE QUESTIONS ABOUT DEMOCRATIC LEADERS!!!"

posts is bizarre and irrational.

Seriously, why so insistent that no one asks these questions?

I suspect you all are just as frightened as those of us who ask the questions that we are going to be subject to Fitzmases, with respect to Biden being able to enact his agenda, with respect to TFG ever getting justice, and with respect to our being able to safeguard future elections. You're just not admitting it.

I am scared of those things. I freely admit it. I wish I could see some progress in ANY of them that eases my mind a little bit. I'm pretty desperate to see some progress, in fact.

I understand that you will tell me I am wrong, but the frantic need, evident in the responses by many in this and other threads, to shut down any questions about what is being done about these issues says I am not.

I expect to receive a response of further outrage that anyone dared to ask "Where is Schumer?" that will include lots of leaps of logic and laughing emojis, and it will not answer the original question.

Have at it, and have a lovely day.

[NurseJackie]

52. I'm not an idiot.

The recent spate of "NEVER POSE QUESTIONS ABOUT DEMOCRATIC LEADERS!!!"
posts is bizarre and irrational.

Nobody is saying that.

Seriously, why so insistent that no one asks these questions?

Nobody is doing that. Listen, i'm not an idiot, okay? I know exactly what's going on. People may want to pretend like they're "just asking an innocent question" but the hostility is obvious.

Asking "Where is Schumer?" in this context and at this time is not innocent. --- Again, I'm not stupid. The obvious insinuation is that he's missing-in-action or doing nothing... and that's offensive.

I suspect you all are just as frightened as those of us who ask the questions that we are going to be subject to Fitzmases, with respect to Biden being able to enact his agenda, with respect to TFG ever getting justice, and with respect to our being able to safeguard future elections. You're just not admitting it.

No, I'm an adult. I live in the real world and I understand that politics can be messy and slow. I know that we don't always win and we don't always get our way. I also understand that nothing good comes from tearing down our Democratic leadership with insinuations that they're disinterested or incompetent.

I'm pretty desperate to see some progress, in fact.

Okay. Well, people who feel that way will have to learn to be patient and check their hostility (or find ways to channel their anger toward those who deserve it or put it to some productive purposes.)

I understand that you will tell me I am wrong, but the frantic need, evident in the responses by many in this and other threads, to shut down any questions about what is being done about these issues says I am not.

So, basically, what you're arguing is that because people WANT to know (and they want to know "right-fucking-now'') that means that they are entitled to know... is that the general idea?

Additionally, are we also supposed to accept the notion that if they don't get the immediate answers they're demanding, then they're perfectly justified in denigrating leadership with "innocent" questions that insinuate absence or incompetence?

Further still, you want me to believe that when loyal Democrats push-back and challenge that type of hostility, then that means the original denigrating insinuations were justified?

Nonsense. Complete hogwash.

that will include lots of leaps of logic and laughing emojis, and it will not answer the original question.

No, the only "leap of logic" going on here is when people presume that because they don't know exactly what's going on behind the scenes... then Schumer must be hiding in his office and working crossword puzzles. Yes, that's laughable.

have a lovely day.

Sure. Whatever. You too.

[Scrivener7]

53. OK, opened this, saw the phrase "complete hogwash" and didn't read the rest.

Be well.

[NurseJackie]

54. Because you know I'm right. Thank you.

I was hoping I wouldn't have to go through that again. The repetitiveness was tiresome.

[boston bean]

67. You are wrong, Jackie.

[boston bean]

65. I posted it because Pelosi is out there taking the hits daily on

these bills. And it is Schumer’s two senators causing all of this.

I was curious as to the double standard. Could it be sexism? Probably.

[boston bean]

66. He is. And Pelosi is not. Why?

[NurseJackie]

71. Thank you for your honestly. It's just as I thought all along.

>> Valid question my ass. It was a clear insinuation that Schumer is "missing in action" or ... that he's lazy and doing-nothing.

He is.

No he's not. But I do thank you for clarifying matters. It's just as I thought all along.

With regard to post 65:

I was curious as to the double standard. Could it be sexism? Probably.

I sincerely doubt it. They have two different management and governing styles. Same holds true when it comes to dealing with the press. People may not like those differences. People may prefer one over the other... but it doesn't mean that he's not doing anything, or that he's AWOL or checked-out.

[boston bean]

72. It's a bit more nuanced. And maybe I could have spoken better or written better.

But Pelosi is hounded and out front in this. You cannot deny that Schumer is not. Why is that when the biggest threat to the dem agenda is two of his members. Is it because of the press?

Why is she hounded and he is not. WHY is he not putting himself out there? again is it the woman taking the brunt.

I am asking.

Please do not insinuate I am a liar.

[True Blue American]

46. Manchin gave Schumer a 1.5 trillion offer.

Anyone who knows how negotiations go knows you ask for the limit!

Buy a house, or car? Same thing.


Sinema is in deep trouble with the Arizona Democratic Party. They plan a No Confidence vote if she votes no. They are already lining up to primary her.

[brooklynite]

27. He's busy not keeping the blogosphere informed of his every action

[True Blue American]

47. :)

[jalan48]

37. Schumer seems unable to speak extemporaneously. When I've seen him in front of the media or

Senate he's reads his speeches in an uninspiring monotone. I've read he's really smart though.

[gojoe12]

42. President Biden

didn't do well with them and Manchin just came out and said he will discuss it next year. My point is I don't think Schumer can do much. We shall see. It is depressing

[CrackityJones75]

44. What the fuck is going on here today?

Honestly there are a number of posts here blaming democrats and propagating right wing talking points. Unintentional or otherwise.

Seriously what the fuck is going on here?

[True Blue American]

48. Thank you for that!

[StarfishSaver]

49. You see it, too?

It seems to be a combination of some freaked out Democrats getting carried away and some folks who have a questionable agenda.

[CrackityJones75]

50. Yep.

And that is about all I can say.

[Treefrog]

55. "Rein."

Kings and queens “reign”

We rein in horses or the Sinemas of the world.

[XanaDUer2]

56. Don't rain on my parade

[Treefrog]

57. Lol, homophones are so confusing!

Note to alerters: please look up homophone before alerting, lol.

[XanaDUer2]

59. lolololol

[Treefrog]

61. Howzit going Xan?

[XanaDUer2]

63. Trying to get my long term

fighting through the uncertainty

[Treefrog]

64. Life seems like one long battle sometimes.

Or is it a long war, and we just try to win the battles along the way?

Hang in there.

[boston bean]

58. Thank you for checking my spelling. Really appreciate it.

[Treefrog]

60. That's one of my bugaboos. Rein or reign. All the there, their, they're things.

English is an odd language, but I love it.

[boston bean]

62. I gotta admit it was a massive contribution to the thread! 😂

Gotta is slang. Please don’t correct it.

[Treefrog]

69. Cool! Glad to hear it!

[boston bean]

70. You're welcome.