Sanders and Warren get Senate leadership posts

Posted by | November 16, 2016 16:01 | Filed under: Good News Politics

After Senator Charles Schumer of New York was elected as the new leader of the Senate Democrats earlier on Wednesday, he gave both Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren leadership roles in the upcoming first Congress under President-elect Donald Trump. Their roles are less meaningful than those of others on the leadership team, but their appointments are…


By: Alan

Alan Colmes is the publisher of Liberaland.

20 responses to Sanders and Warren get Senate leadership posts

  1. Jimmy Fleck November 16th, 2016 at 16:45

    As the minority party, what leadership do they really have in the Senate overall?

    • Gina Bousquet November 16th, 2016 at 17:14

      Parties need leadership, be them majority or minority in the Congress. Is that new?

  2. Foundryman November 16th, 2016 at 16:50

    Joe Manchin is no moderate. He’s a full blown dye in the wool blue dog conservative democrat. Something we don’t need in a leadership position.

    • Suzanne McFly November 16th, 2016 at 18:47

      There were rumors floating around that he was going to switch parties if the Senate went 50/50 after the election. He came out denying it, but it is sad that many believe it is something he would do.

      • Foundryman November 16th, 2016 at 19:01

        Yeah, I heard that too, thats why I was surprised to see him named to the leadership. He’s opposed to any common sense gun control.

        • Suzanne McFly November 16th, 2016 at 19:29

          Well I read how the party doesn’t want to go far left. Right now, they are looking to represent all the lower and middle class workers of America. I guess they believe the working class is against gun laws? I don’t know, but I have a feeling it is going to be ugly from the view on the democratic bus too.

    • Obewon November 16th, 2016 at 20:02

      Yes. But if the D-W.Va Senator brokers an infrastructure compromise, creating new well paying smart renewable energy jobs. Then he can help us succeed instead of bleed.

      • Foundryman November 16th, 2016 at 20:55

        I see what you mean. There is no ‘war on coal’, he needs to work his constituency to show them it’s technology that is reducing the need for coal, not Hillary. Technology is the cause for most all the jobs lost, we’ll need more not less spending on education to create new jobs.

        • Jimmy Fleck November 17th, 2016 at 10:56

          I thought there was a hard push to stop using coal for energy production. Clinton flat out said she was going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business –

          I know here in Memphis we are shuttering our coal fired power plant and building a brand new natural gas fired plant to replace it. The cost to retrofit the coal plant to meet emissions standards was just too costly.

    • Glen November 17th, 2016 at 09:11

      If the Democratic Party moves to the left without bringing the Conservative wing with them, it’ll fracture the party. It’s essential that the so-called “moderates” are included.

      Another way to think about it – someone needs to be the “leader” for the Conservatives in the Democratic party. If they didn’t select one, the Conservatives would complain and basically go rogue a lot more often.

      • Foundryman November 17th, 2016 at 11:27

        That’s what they said about the republicans when the far right lunatics took over that party. All that happened was they silenced the moderates who weren’t primaried and thrown out and ‘normalized’ their far right agenda. Look who they call moderate today, Mike Pence? They did go rogue, and now they are unified while the democrats are still a hodgepodged herd of cats. That’s no way to fight a juggernaut like the far right… IMO

        • Glen November 17th, 2016 at 13:09

          True – but the key, there, is that the Republicans were dealing with the far right. The “Blue Dog” Democrats are “moderate”, in the sense that they lie in the area between Democrat and Republican.

          The Republicans should have rejected the Far Right – what would the Far Right have done? Defect?

          If the Democrats reject the Conservative wing, that wing defects, joining the Republicans. That’s not a desirable outcome – it strengthens the Republicans and weakens the Democrats.

          The conservative wing provides a means within the party to have diversity of views, thereby ensuring that ideas are properly tested and discussed before being put before the country. And it’s not like the Conservative wing of the Democratic party is particularly heinous. Just not quite the right path for the party or for your country.

  3. Kick Frenzy November 16th, 2016 at 19:53

    Hey there Schumer, thanks for throwing a bare bone to Sanders… giving him an official role to handle “outreach to key party constituencies”.
    Like he wasn’t already doing that.

    I feel like this is more of a muzzle than an award.
    I could be wrong, but… jus sayin…

    (I’ve got a bad feeling the Dem party is going to put up a mighty resistance to the left-ward push that people want.)

    • Obewon November 16th, 2016 at 19:56

      This is Great! But you’ll be never satisfied with anything Dem. ~Teabag away~

      • Kick Frenzy November 16th, 2016 at 20:25

        How is it great?
        I’m not asking that in a snarky tone, I am seriously asking how it looks like a great move to you.

        • Obewon November 16th, 2016 at 20:55

          46 Dem Senators plus both Indy’s, equals 48 caucusing Dems in the senate. In two years 25 Dems face reelection in Red states Trump won. Just 7 GOP senators face reelection in 2020.

          Logically I’d prefer to possibly compromise with conservative Dems, opening a dialogue for ‘up or down vote, simple majority’ compromise with repubs. But hey I know the longterm ‘big tent’ strategy isn’t your forte with regards to Dems, post-filibuster.

          • Kick Frenzy November 16th, 2016 at 22:59

            How does that have anything to do with questioning whether Sanders was given a good post or not?

            • Obewon November 17th, 2016 at 01:06

              Like I said “But you’ll be never satisfied with anything Dem.”

              (D-NY) Senator Charles Schumer was elected as the new leader of the Senate Democrats earlier on Wednesday, he gave both (I-Vt) Bernie Sanders and (D-MA) Elizabeth Warren leadership roles in the upcoming first Congress.

              • Kick Frenzy November 17th, 2016 at 21:18

                You say that like I didn’t mention it in my initial post.
                He officially gave Bernie a lower lever role that involves “outreach to key party constituencies”.

                I’m just saying, Schumer gave Bernie an official title to continue doing what he’s been doing all along.
                And I’m not sure if that should be considered a great thing, a good thing or an underhanded move to quiet the waves Bernie makes.

                You’re point seems to be that you want to lob insults at me while completely failing to understand what I’m typing.

  4. eyelashviper November 16th, 2016 at 20:07

    I want to see fire spitting dragons on the Dem side, and those willing to fight to the end. Joe Manchin should be a Goper, he does no nothing to promote the agenda for real people in this country.

Leave a Reply