Slotkin calls for 'new leadership' in the Democratic Party

[DrFunkenstein]

Source: The Hill

Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) on Wednesday called for “new leadership” within the Democratic Party, alleging that the caucus never fully recovered from its 2024 elections losses.

“Every day there’s a debate within the party about the path forward,” Slotkin said during an appearance on SiriusXM’s “Straight Shooter” podcast hosted by Stephen A. Smith.

Slotkin said new leaders are needed in both chambers of Congress, in addition to a new form of messaging that’s singularly focused on a core set of issues.

“That’s why I believe we need significant new leadership. The old models are no longer working, and that includes the Democratic Party,” she added.

Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5941463-slotkin-democrat-leadership-change/

[hlthe2b]

1. Uggh. Slotkin went on with Stephen A. Smith...

Talk about BAD judgement. Uggh. I've liked Slotkin, but damn...

[Exp]

8. We all know she is right. Many here have agreed that Chuckee is a wet noodle. Just about anyone else would do a

better job.

[hlthe2b]

10. Which was not my point... clearly never even mentioned that. It was the venue.

Do you not know what a total moron (and fake liberal/progressive) Stephen A. Smith is? He'll take whatever she says and spin it to his purpose.

[Exp]

13. Doesn't matter if she's on Fox or PBS, she's telling it like it is. She's always had a good message so going on any

show and expanding her audience, or bringing in a new audience is a good idea. This is how Dems have been winning purple districts, by getting out there.

And yeah, I think she knows what she is doing without the help.

[hlthe2b]

14. Again, NOT MY POINT. Clearly you know nothing about Stephen A. Smith. Bye. Done.

[Exp]

15. He's the Af-Am sports guy who gets political. I too think he's an idiot. But that doesn't matter. eom

[flashman13]

31. Who gives a rat's bum about Smith? Obviously she got the message out. And she is 100% right.

We'll agree, Smith's a loser, but he has a platform on Sirius and a big audience. Use it. Next talk to Steve Schmidt, Meidas Touch, Rick Wilson, and Brian Tyler Cohen. Hammer this same message out on every venue possible.

[mdbl]

48. Why do all these losers have large platforms?

I guess Plato was right.

[Lonestarblue]

12. I also think that Ken Martin has not been an effective leader for the DNC.

I thought it was a big mistake to kick David Hogg out of the DNC. i get daily emails from his group, Leaders We Deserve. Here's a paragraph from a recent one with a message from Jane Fonda.

"On Tuesday, July 14th, I’m teaming up with activist and Leaders We Deserve founder David Hogg for a virtual conversation about the future of our country, the power of primaries, and what it will take to elect leaders brave enough to meet this moment."

I have no clue how well Fonda will play with younger voters, but at least he is doing things to reach out to them. I'm unaware of Martin doing anything but occasionally asking for money.

[popsdenver]

30. Good call Mig

As far as I am concerned, the Dems have done nothing the last 46+ years, starting with when HWBush committed TREASON to "Install" Reagan in the White House to be a front man/pawn to HW and his CABAL........

BTW, we here in Denver/Colorado are facing a tsunami of ads for DeGette, Bennett, Hickenlooper. The very first ones we have ever seen in previous decades.........I think they are frightened beyond belief and well should be....These Do-Nothings shouldn't be frightened......They should be mortified of the upcoming election........

I wonder if Bennet becomes Governor, I suspect he will appoint Gov. Polis to fill out the remainder of his term as U.S. Senator.
If Bennet loses the governor race, he will merely return to the senate for another Do-Nothing couple of years.

[QueerDuck]

47. Just a quick reality check on this: David Hogg wasn't actually kicked out of the DNC.

Just a quick reality check on this: David Hogg wasn't actually kicked out of the DNC. He was elected as a Vice Chair in February 2025, but he chose to step down voluntarily a few months later in June.

The issue wasn't his activism, but a major conflict of interest with his PAC, Leaders We Deserve. His group planned to spend $20 million to primary older, establishment Democrats in safe seats to usher in a new generation of leadership.

DNC Chair Ken Martin and other party leaders pointed out that DNC officers are required to remain neutral arbiters in primaries and cannot actively work to unseat incumbent Democrats.

When the DNC called for a redo of the vice-chair elections due to procedural rules, Hogg decided not to run again so he could fully focus on running his PAC and backing those primary challenges without violating DNC neutrality.

[LiberalLovinLug]

54. Not that they actually have abided by that edict in the past.

[QueerDuck]

64. Nobody is saying party insiders don't have their biases...

... but leaning into the idea that committees control everything gives them way too much credit. There's a big difference between individual members having personal preferences and the system being actively "rigged." They operate on rules and spreadsheets, not absolute control.

If committees truly had the power to dictate outcomes, the establishment would have successfully blocked outsiders like Trump on the right or completely stopped insurgent campaigns on our side in the past.

I understand the cynicism, but at some point, we have to look at the actual math. No backroom committee can force millions of individual voters to pull a specific lever in the voting booth. In the end, the ultimate power still rests entirely with the voters who show up. If a grassroots candidate has the numbers, the committee simply can't stop them.

[LiberalLovinLug]

66. They HAVE worked against outsiders. If Sanders is an "outsider"

They have acted completely biased and put their thumb on the scales for one candidate over the other. That's because they could, as there is no actual law against it. Ultimately the DNC can finangle whomever they want to win...or at least try as hard as they can to cut the legs out of competing candidates.

Sanders was betrayed in '16 by Wasserman and the DNC. First off, she gave Hillary the questions in advance for her debate.

In the lead up to Iowa, the DNC claimed that Bernie staffers had hacked the Hillary side of the voter database and used it as a pretext to freeze Bernie's access to the voter database. In reality, both sides had access to each other's data and the Bernie side realized, ran a few searches to see how extensive the security breach was, and reported it to the DNC. The DNC used that as a pretext to block Bernie's access to the data collected by his own staff to hamper Bernie's turn out the vote effort. Bernie had to sue to get access back.

The DNC also helped Hillary launder donations and circumvent campaign finance maximums. The maximum donors could legally donate directly to Hillary was legally $2,700. But by having donors donate $10,000 to each of the state parties and $33,400 and then sending that money back to Hillary, they were able to donate $356,100 per person. Ultimately, she raised over $82 million through the scheme and allowed the state parties to keep about half of one percent. The DNC didn't disclose that publicly at the time and later said they would have done it for Sanders too if he asked (which is hilarious since Bernie's average donation was $2,700). Ultimately, that resulted in the state parties being in dire financial straits since all the best Democratic donors had already donated the legal maximum to the state parties and the state parties essentially hadn't got any money out of it. https://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/dnc-leak-clinton-team-deflected-state-cash-concerns-226191

Ultimately, when Bernie donors sued arguing that the DNC purported to hold a fair primary while secretly rigging it which fraudulently induced them to donate to Bernie, the DNC pled in court that it had every right to rig its primary in a smoke filled back room if it wanted to.

In the court's dismissal, it quoted the DNC's argument disapprovingly before conceding that the DNC had a legal right to rig the primary even though it had an ethical obligation not to: "For their part, the DNC and Wasserman Schultz have characterized the DNC charter’s promise of ‘impartiality and evenhandedness’ as a mere political promise—political rhetoric that is not enforceable in federal courts.

[QueerDuck]

67. There's no doubt 2016 had its share of ugly behind-the-scenes insider bias and messy administrative drama...

... but trying to litigate ten-year-old primary rules isn't going to win us the House this November. At some point, we have to move forward, especially since Bernie Sanders himself explicitly closed the book on this a long time ago.

When asked directly about the 2016 DNC drama, Bernie himself publicly stated that he didn't want to look backward, noting that it was useless to keep litigating the past. He consistently maintained that the real reason his campaign came up short was simply a matter of votes, pointing out that they just didn't win enough states.

If Bernie can move past 2016 to focus entirely on defeating the GOP, we should probably follow his lead. The rules have completely changed since then anyway. Let's keep our eyes on the upcoming election rather than fighting old primary battles. Let it go. It's time to move on.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

[DemocracyForever]

55. DCCC is involved in dem Congressional primaries

in order to help dem candidates who support the status quo. This is so wrong. We the people will decide who our nominees are, NOT the DCCC.

[QueerDuck]

63. I completely get the frustration with national committees getting involved in local primaries...

... we absolutely should be the ones deciding our nominees. But the DCCC's involvement usually comes down to cold electoral math rather than an ideological purity test.

Their single goal is protecting and winning the House majority. When they step into a primary, it’s typically because internal polling or fundraising data shows that one candidate is a massive general election risk or completely lacks the millions needed to survive the GOP onslaught.

The reality is that the DCCC doesn't operate on ideology... they operate on a "spreadsheet." Their only mandate is protecting the Democratic majority. It’s definitely annoying to see national groups weigh in, but at the end of the day, the power still stays with the local voters who actually show up to the ballot box. The DCCC can pour money into a race or endorsement, but they don't get a vote in the booth.

[kimbutgar]

18. I can't stand him

He is such a two faced a hole!

And a repuke in disguise.

[Soul_of_Wit]

19. Our elected representatives should not live in bubbles

I support Democrats who go where the moderates/persuadables might be. Those are the votes needed to win elections. It's why I would support someone like Pete Buttigieg if he ran for POTUS. He can stand on his own, outside of the bubble.

I enjoy DU and always vote for Democrats. I also have news sources which I don't always agree with. The Bulwark and The Atlantic are must reads. Then there are opinionated blowhards, who I choose not to have living rent-free in my brain. Stephen A. Smith is a cipher, unless he runs for office himself.

[hlthe2b]

20. So, not the point. Slotkin can go on any program, but she should not give him the attention

he seeks. He has a history of nutty behavior and no one should put any "created" spin beyond him for attention. You don't know him, apparently, or you would not be chastising ME for my VALID opinion--as shared by others here. When one of ours goes on a RW podcast or Fox or any other media, it is well known what they are all about. That Smith claims to be a Liberal Democrat and "merely a truth-teller wanting to say it like it is about his own party" while saying anything and everything--no matter how untrue-- to create attention to himself is the problem. People watch him because he is outrageous and listen to him because he claims to be what he is not. Hell, if you watch him re: sports, you know he does that continually, but who the hell cares in that context...?

Have your own opinion, but I have every damned right to MINE-- that KNOWS what he is all about! He is all about Stephen A. Smith and no lie, no bastardized story, no bizarre attempt to paint a true Democrat as something they truly are NOT, is beyond him. He's shown that repeatedly. But you be you and adore him. Most of use see through him. Slotkin showed very poor judgement going on his show.

[Soul_of_Wit]

23. I apparently touched a nerve

I don't recall denying anyone their opinion. I also don't recall questioning your expertise in all things Stephen A. Smith. Finally, I certainly showed no appreciation for Stephen A. Smith, let alone adoration.

My appreciation is for Democrats who venture outside of bubbles.

To summarize, Sen. Slotkin "can go on any program," except one?

[Akakoji]

25. This is a gratuitously nasty and arrogant response

No reason to be so full of yourself.

[hlthe2b]

26. What a "polite" thing to say...

[Akakoji]

46. It apparently seems to work

In both facilitating constructive discourse, and deterring unbridled expressions of negativity directed at individuals with the sole purpose of harm. They serve no appropriate role in any conversation. SOP for Republicans is not something we should inflict on each other. I’ll gladly give the number of any Republican you’d like.

[Torchlight]

68. Sounds serious

Good luck

[Scubamatt]

22. I share . . .

Rep. Slotkin's sentiments, but why does she have to air them so publicly in a way that the corporate media will simply trot out its "Democrats in Disarray" canard? Why not just support fresh candidates with fresh ideas? That sends the message just as well without giving the bad guys great talking points. We can be principled and smart at the same time.

[Raven123]

36. I often have that sentiment on these issues re:inner workings of the party

This time I am beginning to wonder if talking about new leadership may be a plus for Dems. Is it possible that we could bring out voters who otherwise would stay home because they perceive the party as ineffective? If Trump is working overtime to suppress the vote, could it be we need high a highly visible message that we will do things differently, starting with new leadership? Both parties have low approval ratings per every poll I have seen lately.

I don’t know the right answer, but I this has been on my mind.

[dave99]

2. Looks like someone was not included

[awesomerwb1]

3. I wholeheartedly agree

Chris Murphy should be one.

Jamie Raskin

[blm]

4. Oh, hey, old buddy.

🫶🏽

[DrFunkenstein]

6. blm!!!!

Keep fighting the good fight!

[blm]

7. 😘

[msongs]

5. is she volunteering to be the new leadership?

[LuvLoogie]

9. She's got a ways to go given her yes vote on the Laken Riley Act.

[LudwigPastorius]

40. ...not volunteering so much as lobbying to be it.

[Akakoji]

69. It appears so.

Interview here:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/slotkin-pitches-herself-as-the-way-forward-after-democrats-2024-shellacking/ar-AA26Dhtl

[Exp]

11. Slotkin is awesome. She was brave as a brand new Rep in Congress to vote for impeaching TSF. That was a biggie

for her as a new Rep from a kind of conservative district.

[Fiendish Thingy]

16. I'm guessing she wants to be majority leader

I hope she remembers that “new” doesn’t just mean new people, but more importantly, new ideas and methods of getting shit done .

[Katcat]

21. Me too

We need someone with enough fure to be willing to go to bat for US and not just the rich

[RockRaven]

27. Looking at the results of the *past decade* not the past 1-2 years, that's a "no shit" conclusion.

Whether Slotkin deserves to be handed a microphone or a mirror is less clear.

[Midwestern Democrat]

45. No kidding - these problems within the party should have been addressed at least 16 years ago. NT

[DemocracyForever]

56. They should've been addressed with the

Senate dem failure to stop Bush 2000 election theft. Does anyone think the repugs would've hid in their cushy, ivory Washington towers if Bush was behind by 537 votes with 160,000 votes in heavily republican voting Florida counties not counted? Not a chance.

[DAngelo136]

28. Sorry To Inform You....

But as a Black man in NYC, I WILL NOT let go of the opportunity of Hakeem Jeffries to become the first Black Speaker of The House of Representatives.
That is non negotiable....a non starter...dead on arrival...It is not a "hill I'm willing to die on", it's is turf I'm willing to defend.

For decades, white Democrats have asked for and expected Black Democrats to support and get behind the agenda laid out by leadership. We have done so and we have been told "to wait our turn". I watched as Adam Clayton Powell was torpedoed out of an opportunity , then Charles Rangel and now, suddenly there's dissatisfaction with Jeffries? Right on the cusp when the Democrats will likely take the House?

Hell to the no!

Unless he totally capitulates to the Republicans and becomes the next Byron Donalds, I'm sticking with him. And I expect enthusiastic, energetic support from the rank and file. When the next session of Congress convenes, I fully expect to see Mike Johnson hand over the gavel to Hakeem Jeffries to be the incoming Speaker of the House.

All this mumbling and grumbling I'm really not in the mood for. Now, you want to pressure him? Go right ahead. You want to make him go further left? Have at it. But replace him? Not happn' Cap'n.

Now, you know where I stand. And after I finish this, so too will Congresswoman Slotkin when I write a rather nice letter informing her of my position as a lifetime Democratic voter in NYC.

Thank you for your attention.

[Quiet Em]

50. The entire Congressional Black Caucus hit back on her statement

They posted it to social media yesterday

[JBTaurus83]

52. I agree with you on Jeffries

I don’t see any reason for replacing him. I think he does fairly well trying to hold our coalition together. Schumer, and others in leadership should definitely be replaced though. We shouldn’t reward people over and over and allow them to “fail forward”.

[DemocracyForever]

57. Well said!

I don't think Jeffries is the problem. I'm excited to see the 1st African American Speaker of the House. I think the leadership problem is on the Senate side. As far as African Americans being the backbone of the democratic party but still getting the shaft, there's no better example of it than the fact that most of the 160,000 uncounted Florida 2000 ballots are the ballots of low income African American women. If only they'd instead been wealthy white men dem party donors. No one should forget that Senate dems couldn't abandon Al Gore's fight to have the uncounted Florida votes counted fast enough and then they refused to co-sponsor the Congressional Black Caucus's challenged to the fraudulent Florida vote count.

[Cirsium]

29. Stephen A. Smith???

Here he is recently on CNN: “I’m not here to denigrate or insult the president of the United States. He is certainly an upgrade from what we were seeing from Joe Biden in terms of his alertness.”

Here he is on Twitter: "Gotta be honest, this @ufc event at the White House looks spectacular. This is a big time show. I’m not there, and we all know all the complaints folks had about renovations at and around the White House, etc, but — to be fair — this is some impressive stuff I’m looking at. Props to UFC President @danawhite and the show they’ve put on. It’s Bigtime. Plain and simple!!!"

ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith is a megaphone for MAGA propaganda

When white nationalist Nick Fuentes recently praised ESPN host Stephen A. Smith, it was just the latest in a series of data points showing how the loudest voice in sports entertainment has become a boon to MAGA world. Fuentes praised Smith, arguably ESPN’s most cherished employee, for being “clearly” red-pilled (a term for those who have embraced right-wing ideology) since he hosted far-right influencer Candace Owens on his show.

Smith’s far-right sympathies have seemed clear to me for years. I still remember, as a high schooler, witnessing his weak defense — interestingly enough, on MSNBC — of right-wingers who formed the anti-Obama tea party back in 2009. And a report I covered last year, highlighting various platforms that disseminate right-wing propaganda and misinformation among Black audiences, listed Smith’s show as one of the top culprits.

Last year, for example, Smith told his friend Sean Hannity, whose Fox News show he has appeared on numerous times, that liberals were weaponizing the legal system to stop Donald Trump’s momentum ahead of the 2024 election. “Primarily, I have voted Democrat throughout my life, but I’m utterly disgusted with what I’m seeing,” he said.

https://www.ms.now/top-stories/latest/stephen-a-smith-espn-nick-fuentes-maga-trump-rcna198261

[Skittles]

32. I agree

some folk need to PASS THE FUCKING BATON ALREADY

[Mark.b2]

34. Power is hard to give up.

Too many people think they are the only ones who can run the show.

[Skittles]

39. yeah, I know

I find it disgusting

[Ponietz]

33. "Strongly worded letters" didn't cut it

[Charlie Chapulin]

35. Chuck and Hakeem beg to differ

[DemocracyForever]

58. No comparison between Hakeem and Chuck

Hakeem isn't the problem.

[Baitball Blogger]

37. Why is this so fucking hard.

In the last election, the American people took for granted that the Democratic party would still be around to uphold Social Security, food programs and also hold the line on Universal health programs. They took it for granted, which is why they voted for Republicans believing their talk track of a better economy. And then the grift began, and not only have Americans lost their safety nets, they're now seeing their tax dollars going to grifting projects. Bottomline, the party that they expected to provide the guardrails to stop the Republicans, were too weak in numbers to stop the massive mess we are in today.

So, this is so damn easy. The Democratic Party stands for Universal Healthcare, food programs, Social Security, Stronger education programs to support our diverse populations. Call yourselves whatever you fucking want to, but stand for these programs.

But here is the problem for Centrist Democrats: Those who are calling themselves Democratic Socialist are behind all these programs and once they come into office, they deliver. So you need to figure out what it is about Centrist Democrats that is undermining their success at the ballot boxes. Because, if they still think they can satisfy and cater to the corporations, and still do good on promises to the people, then maybe they deserve to lose. This combination of objectives hasn't worked in over twenty years.

[creeksneakers2]

44. We don't cater to corporations

We actually got improvements in health care,. unlike progressives who haven't accomplished anything and won't. Please stop spreading this nonsense that universal heath care is some magic bullet. After we did just Hillary care and Obama care we lost 60 seats for each . They tried a single payer ballot initiative in liberal Oregon and it lost 78 to 21. One reason we lose, probably the main one is progressives do all they can to sabotage us. Lies about us catering to corporations is an example.

Centrists did tons of stuff during the last 20 years. Progressives accomplished nothing.

[Baitball Blogger]

53. Totally disagree.

Starting with Clinton’s Administration that completely capitulated to the Republicans on welfare and also deregulated the banks. Idk, it’slike they had something on him.

And I lived through the sixties so saying progressives did nothing makes the rest of your comments suspect.

[creeksneakers2]

59. Back in the 60s they stopped the war

Nothing since. Name their accomplishments. We took a severe beating in 1996 and Clinton had to pivot to the right on some things and welfare was extremely unpopular. Here's what he did accomplish: https://clintonwhitehouse5.archives.gov/WH/Accomplishments/eightyears-01.html

[Baitball Blogger]

62. Not interested in revisiting the past.

I lived through it. Democrats kept backing off, thinking they could find common ground with the Right, and the Right ran right over us. It's not Centrists who are standing up to them. It's everybody else, people who are being targeted by White Supremacists and/or actually need government protection. They're laying it all on the line.

Look, I don't care about the labels. I care about politicians who are committed to fighting and winning. If you can't provide a candidate that can convince voters that they have the commitment to stand up to the Republicans, you're going to lose. It's very simple. I will vote for anyone who can convince me they're serious. Frankly, it's the Centrist Democrats who seem to be getting hot and bothered because progressives and other Lefties are winning. It's not a problem for me to solve for them. It's something that they have to figure out for themselves.

[creeksneakers2]

65. Progressives make us lose.

Over and over and they are at it again. And they lie about what we do. They cost us the Supreme Court and now we don't have Roe v Wade or the ability to use the Clean Air Act to control greenhouse gasses and will lose most of our black members of Congress and on and on. Here is the nothing you say moderates have accomplished.

Under Carter: 3. Department of Energy and Energy Policy
In response to the 1970s energy crisis, Carter created the Department of Energy to centralize and address energy-related challenges. His administration implemented policies encouraging energy conservation and the development of renewable energy sources like solar and wind power.
Carter also pushed for the development of fuel-efficient technologies and issued tax incentives for energy-saving measures, laying the groundwork for future advancements in energy independence.
4. Environmental Protection
Carter’s commitment to environmental conservation was evident in the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980. This legislation protected over 100 million acres of Alaskan wilderness by designating new national parks, wildlife refuges, and forests.

It remains one of the largest land conservation efforts in U.S. history. Carter also expanded other environmental programs and supported measures to limit pollution and protect endangered species.
8. Urban Policy Initiatives
Carter introduced programs to support urban development, focusing on improving public transportation, affordable housing, and job creation in economically struggling cities.

His administration worked to reduce poverty and unemployment in urban areas, addressing the needs of vulnerable populations. These efforts demonstrated Carter’s commitment to addressing domestic challenges alongside his foreign policy achievements.

Under Clinton: Longest economic expansion in American history
The President's strategy of fiscal discipline, open foreign markets and investments in the American people helped create the conditions for a record 115 months of economic expansion. Our economy has grown at an average of 4 percent per year since 1993.
More than 22 million new jobs
More than 22 million jobs were created in less than eight years -- the most ever under a single administration, and more than were created in the previous twelve years.
Highest homeownership in American history
A strong economy and fiscal discipline kept interest rates low, making it possible for more families to buy homes. The homeownership rate increased from 64.2 percent in 1992 to 67. 7 percent, the highest rate ever.
Lowest unemployment in 30 years
Unemployment dropped from more than 7 percent in 1993 to just 4.0 percent in November 2000. Unemployment for African Americans and Hispanics fell to the lowest rates on record, and the rate for women is the lowest in more than 40 years.
Raised education standards, increased school choice, and doubled education and training investment
Since 1992, reading and math scores have increased for 4th, 8th, and 12th graders, math SAT scores are at a 30-year high, the number of charter schools has grown from 1 to more than 2,000, forty-nine states have put in place standards in core subjects and federal investment in education and training has doubled.
Largest expansion of college opportunity since the GI Bill
President Clinton and Vice President Gore have nearly doubled financial aid for students by increasing Pell Grants to the largest award ever, expanding Federal Work-Study to allow 1 million students to work their way through college, and by creating new tax credits and scholarships such as Lifetime Learning tax credits and the HOPE scholarship. At the same time, taxpayers have saved $18 billion due to the decline in student loan defaults, increased collections and savings from the direct student loan program.
Connected 95 percent of schools to the Internet
President Clinton and Vice President Gore's new commitment to education technology, including the E-Rate and a 3,000 percent increase in educational technology funding, increased the percentage of schools connected to the Internet from 35 percent in 1994 to 95 percent in 1999.
Lowest crime rate in 26 years
Because of President Clinton's comprehensive anti-crime strategy of tough penalties, more police, and smart prevention, as well as common sense gun safety laws, the overall crime rate declined for 8 consecutive years, the longest continuous drop on record, and is at the lowest level since 1973.
100,000 more police for our streets
As part of the 1994 Crime Bill, President Clinton enacted a new initiative to fund 100,000 community police officers. To date more than 11,000 law enforcement agencies have received COPS funding.
Enacted most sweeping gun safety legislation in a generation
Since the President signed the Brady bill in 1993, more than 600,000 felons, fugitives, and other prohibited persons have been stopped from buying guns. Gun crime has declined 40 percent since 1992.
Family and Medical Leave Act for 20 million Americans
To help parents succeed at work and at home, President Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act in 1993. Over 20 million Americans have taken unpaid leave to care for a newborn child or sick family member.
Smallest welfare rolls in 32 years
The President pledged to end welfare as we know it and signed landmark bipartisan welfare reform legislation in 1996. Since then, caseloads have been cut in half, to the lowest level since 1968, and millions of parents have joined the workforce. People on welfare today are five times more likely to be working than in 1992.
Higher incomes at all levels
After falling by nearly $2,000 between 1988 and 1992, the median family's income rose by $6,338, after adjusting for inflation, since 1993. African American family income increased even more, rising by nearly $7,000 since 1993. After years of stagnant income growth among average and lower income families, all income brackets experienced double-digit growth since 1993. The bottom 20 percent saw the largest income growth at 16.3 percent.
Lowest poverty rate in 20 years
Since Congress passed President Clinton's Economic Plan in 1993, the poverty rate declined from 15.1 percent to 11.8 percent last year — the largest six-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years. There are now 7 million fewer people in poverty than in 1993. The child poverty rate declined more than 25 percent, the poverty rates for single mothers, African Americans and the elderly have dropped to their lowest levels on record, and Hispanic poverty dropped to its lowest level since 1979.
Lowest teen birth rate in 60 years
In his 1995 State of the Union Address, President Clinton challenged Americans to join together in a national campaign against teen pregnancy. The birth rate for teens aged 15-19 declined every year of the Clinton Presidency, from 60.7 per 1,000 teens in 1992 to a record low of 49.6 in 1999.
Lowest infant mortality rate in American history
The Clinton Administration expanded efforts to provide mothers and newborn children with health care. Today, a record high 82 percent of all mothers receive prenatal care. The infant mortality rate has dropped from 8.5 deaths per 1,000 in 1992 to 7.2 deaths per 1,000 in 1998, the lowest rate ever recorded.
Deactivated more than 1,700 nuclear warheads from the former Soviet Union
Efforts of the Clinton-Gore Administration led to the dismantling of more than 1,700 nuclear warheads, 300 launchers and 425 land and submarine based missiles from the former Soviet Union.
Protected millions of acres of American land
President Clinton has protected more land in the lower 48 states than any other president. He has protected 5 new national parks, designated 11 new national monuments and expanded two others and proposed protections for 60 million acres of roadless areas in America's national forests.
Paid off $360 billion of the national debt
Between 1998-2000, the national debt was reduced by $363 billion — the largest three-year debt pay-down in American history. We are now on track to pay off the entire debt by 2009.
Converted the largest budget deficit in American history to the largest surplus
Thanks in large part to the 1993 Deficit Reduction Act, the 1997 Balanced Budget Act, and President Clinton's call to save the surplus for debt reduction, Social Security, and Medicare solvency, America has put its fiscal house in order. The deficit was $290 billion in 1993 and expected to grow to $455 billion by this year. Instead, we have a projected surplus of $237 billion.
Lowest government spending in three decades
Under President Clinton federal government spending as a share of the economy has decreased from 22.2 percent in 1992 to a projected 18.5 percent in 2000, the lowest since 1966.
Lowest federal income tax burden in 35 years
President Clinton enacted targeted tax cuts such as the Earned Income Tax Credit expansion, $500 child tax credit, and the HOPE Scholarship and Lifetime Learning Tax Credits. Federal income taxes as a percentage of income for the typical American family have dropped to their lowest level in 35 years.
More families own stock than ever before
The number of families owning stock in the United States increased by 40 percent since 1992.
Most diverse cabinet in American history
The President has appointed more African Americans, women and Hispanics to the Cabinet than any other President in history. He appointed the first female Attorney General, the first female Secretary of State and the first Asian American cabinet secretary ever.

Under Obama: 1. Affordable Care Act (ACA) – “Obamacare”
The Affordable Care Act, often referred to as “Obamacare,” was a transformative piece of legislation aimed at overhauling the U.S.
healthcare system.
2. Economic Recovery
When Obama took office in 2009, the United States was in the midst of the Great Recession, the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

His administration passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, a $787 billion stimulus package that funded infrastructure projects, extended unemployment benefits, and provided tax cuts.

The stimulus helped stabilize the economy, leading to a recovery that saw job growth, a declining unemployment rate, and a rebound in GDP by the end of his presidency.

3. Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform
In response to the financial crisis of 2008, Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act into law in 2010. This legislation aimed to prevent future economic crises by increasing regulation of the financial sector.
Barack Obama was the first sitting president to publicly support same-sex marriage. His administration championed LGBTQ+ rights, and in 2015, the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Obergefell v. Hodges legalized marriage equality nationwide.

This historic ruling ensured that same-sex couples had the right to marry and receive equal treatment under the law, marking a major step forward for civil rights in the United States.

6. Paris Climate Agreement



It expanded healthcare coverage to millions of uninsured Americans, provided subsidies to low- and middle-income families, and made Medicaid expansion possible in participating states.
Key provisions included preventing insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions and allowing young adults to remain on their parents’ insurance plans until age 26. By the end of Obama’s presidency, the ACA had significantly reduced the uninsured rate and made healthcare more accessible and affordable for millions.
As part of his commitment to addressing climate change, Obama played a key role in securing the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015. Nearly 200 countries pledged to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and take action to limit global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. The agreement represented a significant global effort to combat climate change, with the United States taking a leadership role under Obama’s administration.
8. Auto Industry Rescue
During the Great Recession, the American auto industry faced potential collapse. Obama’s administration provided financial assistance to General Motors and Chrysler through a controversial bailout program.

The intervention saved hundreds of thousands of jobs, stabilized the auto industry, and eventually led to a resurgence in U.S. car manufacturing. By the end of Obama’s presidency, the auto industry was profitable again and had repaid much of the bailout money.

9. Advancing Renewable Energy
Obama prioritized clean energy initiatives and invested heavily in renewable energy during his presidency. Through programs like the Recovery Act, his administration funded research and development for solar and wind power, energy efficiency, and electric vehicles.

10. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)
In 2012, Obama announced the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which provided temporary protection from deportation for undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children, often referred to as “Dreamers.”

Under Biden: 10. Passed the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure package to increase investment in the national network of bridges and roads, airports, public transport and national broadband internet, as well as waterways and energy systems.

2. Helped get more than 500 million life-saving COVID-19 vaccinations in the arms of Americans through the American Rescue Plan.

3. Stopped a 30-year streak of federal inaction on gun violence by signing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act that created enhanced background checks, closed the “boyfriend” loophole and provided funds for youth mental health.

4. Made a $369 billion investment in climate change, the largest in American history, through the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.

5. Ended the longest war in American history by pulling the troops out of Afghanistan.

6. Provided $10,000 to $20,000 in college debt relief to Americans with loans who make under $125,000 a year.

7. Cut child poverty in half through the American Rescue Plan.

8. Capped prescription drug prices at $2,000 per year for seniors on Medicare through the Inflation Reduction Act.

9. Passed the COVID-19 relief deal that provided payments of up to $1,400 to many struggling U.S. citizens while supporting renters and increasing unemployment benefits.

10. Achieved historically low unemployment rates after the pandemic caused them to skyrocket.

11. Imposed a 15% minimum corporate tax on some of the largest corporations in the country, ensuring that they pay their fair share,

15. Gave Medicare the power to negotiate prescription drug prices through the Inflation Reduction Act while also reducing government health spending.

19. Reduced healthcare premiums under the Affordable Care Act by $800 a year as part of the American Rescue Plan.

2. Reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act through 2027.

And we would have done much more if Progressive had not made us lose the White House in 2000 and 2016,

[Baitball Blogger]

70. Didn't read anything past the first sentence.

And I don’t believe it’s the progressives who are the cause of the problems. Centrist do a lot of talking and that’s about it.

[Magoo48]

38. It's simple

Stay Calm,
Everyone take 3 giant steps to the left,
And move forward.

[lees1975]

41. She's right. I don't disagree.

We have an indicted criminal in the White House because we wasted four years playing old school politics as usual and never used the power we had to bring him to justice, which we certainly could have done, and no excuses will explain that away. That included knowing what a barrier the Supreme Court would be to all of this and not making a real attempt to get rid of them, or at least pack the court, and overturn Citizens United, the immunity rulings and overturning Dobbs, among other things.

People like Slotkin are leading the opposition. Millions are out in the streets, and while the polling data is favorable to Democrats right now, it's not anything close to what it should be.

[Akakoji]

42. Please explain how leaders such as Schumer and Jeffries are to blame

For the tiny number of even registered voters that participate in any election. If every registered Democrat, for example, voted there is no arm of government we would not have a majority in. As Slotkin stated in the interview - she wants to replace the leaders she criticizes. Where was she when Biden nominated and tolerated Garland? Or Obama allowed McConnell to prevent him from a SCOTUS pick? Leaders are rarely the problem if people help elect them. But if so few people participate the people in charge are the ones that cater to the base voters that actually vote, not the loud critics or protestors that don’t vote.

[MichMan]

49. She wasn't elected to the Senate until 2024

As a member of the House, she had no say on confirming Garland or anyone else.

[Akakoji]

71. She has been in the Federal Government since 2014

She was in the federal government since 2014. She was in the House. She still had a voice. She said nothing. She was Director for Iraq Policy on the National Security Council under Obama in 2014. She has no excuse. Ambition, yes.

[DemocracyForever]

60. Current dem Senate don't fight back strategy is the real problem

This don't fight back strategy started in 2000 with letting Bush steal the 2000 election and it's been downhill ever since. The dem Senate leadership was clueless to the threat that the Bush 2000 election theft posed to our country and they're still just as clueless about the threat that Trump now poses. They keep bringing slingshots to the fight while the repugs are bringing AK-47s. It's long past due for this failed Senate dem don't fight back strategy to end.

[creeksneakers2]

43. We need to concentrate on stopping Trump

Why go to war with each other now?

[no_hypocrisy]

51. Any suggestions for substitution?

Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?

[DemocracyForever]

61. Senator Chris Van Hollen

will end the dem Senate's failed don't fight back strategy. He's my suggestion.