I don't really want either. But the reality at this point is, they're the two most powerful Senators after Reid.
One of them is going to get it

He was the first senator I recall going down on the senate floor criticizing Guantanamo and what was happening at Abu Gharib
He was pilloried for it
Turned out everything he said was true
I support him for it
I just wonder if he's the best face for the party
He's one of the best strategists certainly
I know a lot of people at DU would probably prefer Warren
Not sure I would agree

I think it should be someone who can run the caucus, which apparently Reid could and have media presence

Thanks for the link
I just disagree with him.
But, I will admit that Schumer having been the man who rounded up a lot of candidates in the later part of 2000's through 2012, probably has a lot of support among the Senate members

I just don't trust Schumer. Wouldn't vote for him in any primary. But I am not from New York.

He turns my stomach, although admittedly I voted for him 3 times.

hell to pay for them at the polls in 2016. If there is a war because of this foolishness, a lot of people will be sitting home in 2016.

Not learning from the mistakes from the invasion of Iraq is unforgivable

I WISH there would be but there won't.

party.

Keep in mind instead of the MSM assessment that a veto over-ride is possible, it may not happen. We have Senators such as Feinstein, Boxer, Franken, and perhaps some republicans such as Collins who support the international agreement with Iran

Not the "American Voter" I have watched vote lately. The media is already allowing idiots to trash the deal on TV unchallenged making it look like Obama is being played the fool by the Iranians. Seriously, we are talking about an electorate that trust FOX "News" more than President Obama on Climate Change & that is primarily due to an AWOL news media...The same exact thing is happening now with the Iran deal.

Chuck Schumer is one of the biggest idiots in government & he will be leading the party (Senate) soon...We are fucked. Leadership in the Senate & house both suck! They watched us invade Iraq & torture & did nothing...They will watch us go to war with Iran & do nothing if not jump on board the war train like they did last time. USA USA USA.

They RAN from the AHCA ...

They SHOULD have championed it, should have said it isn't perfect, but better than what we had and screamed about the positives and hammered the shit out of republicans for having no plan.

But, they cowered in a corner, let it roll up on them and got their asses handed to them in 2010.

This is a REALLY good thing, they need to rally behind it, but instead allow the jackasses to get traction in opposing it by saddling up with them.

Least we not forget, this fucknuts voted for the IWR, too.

I tried to get through to Schumer's office but could not get through yesterday. I will try it again today. I am hoping that he is getting a lot of negative feedback

I do not believe the American People want yet another war. Make each one of these war mongers have to defend their position to the public in their re-election campaigns.

I hope the president turns up the heat on these fuckers.

The strategy of AIPAC influenced Democrats is pretty straight forward and it plays out over the next few months. By shifting the debate from the merits of any negotiated deal with Iran instead to the necessity of Congress getting to vote on it, they position themselves to let Republicans take the blame for the blow up of negotiations. If Congress votes to override an Obama veto of legislation forcing congressional approval of an Iran deal, congressional Democrats like Schemer can later vote in favor of whatever emerges from the Iran negotiations knowing full well that simple Republican majorities in both houses will kill the deal anyway without their votes needed.

If the deal is killed by Congress it will be a done deed by mid Summer 2015. From that point on Iran will know full well where they stand and they will therefor be unrestrained by intentional agreements concerning their nuclear program. With that fully evident Israel then will have the political cover they need to bomb Iranian facilities on their own, since that would no longer fly in the face of any standing agreement the United States entered into with Iran (it having been killed by Congress). They will then count on the U.S. to back them if Iran retaliates. With prospects of any peaceful resolution formally dead and buried, and with a key American ally under attack, the U.S. will be drawn into the war. This will happen before the first 2016 presidential primary even happens. No one running for President will oppose aiding Israel once that point is reached.

That is the plan. It all hinges on Congress overriding an Obama veto o whether or not Congress gets to vote on the negotiated settlement with Iran. If Congress gets to vote, the hawks in Congress have the votes needed to ensure a war.

subsequent moves of their opponents to the route they plan for them, as you suggest.

Many, many smart people underestimate how much planning goes into these manipulation tactics.

Nations around the world

That is exactly what the bill in question that Chuck Schumer is supporting requires. Obama can veto it and then there is no constitutional reason why Congress gets a say, as you point out. But if Congress has the votes to override an Obama veto of this bill, Obama will no longer be able to do it on his own.

n/t

Lots of his constituents are, too. That's why he can't support the President's policy on Iran.

Did the Iraq War help Israel? I would say no, Israel is much less secure now than before that war. Will bombing Iran be 'better' for Israel? Or is it just better for the rightwingers in Israel to hold their grip on power there by constantly promoting a state of extreme fear?

Rational people who are truly interested in the viability of Israel support a peace agreement, not pointless saber-rattling and intransigence.

Maybe. But Chuck's pro-Israeli constituents are driven by emotion, not strictly by rationality.

Chuck is an Israel-hack. He puts it before NY or even America.

This one:

For some reason, sarcasm doesn't come across as such in print.

It's just a political reality here--Democrat, Republican, black, white, Catholic, Jewish, doesn't matter, they all kiss Israel's ass.

and he's spent a very long time gathering supporters.

What, you thought he was supposed to actually represent people?!

with his thinking.
Instead, Dems are going to make him their leader.
What could possibly go wrong?

Schumer is pandering. Here's a chance to maybe have more normal relations with Iran, change the dynamics. But f'ing Democrats do what they can to screw up what should be a celebrated accomplishment. They make me sick.

Sen Schumer has long been a supporter of Israel. I am sure the current rhetoric from Tel Aviv has both his office and his constituents interest.

'good old boys' club. Period.

The Congress cannot be depended on to be an honest and reliable participant in anything.
Schumer has lost all credibility in dealing with the right-wing neocon crazies.

I have just written to Senator Schumer to express my dismay. Respectfully, but firmly. In my message, I noted that while I cannot vote for him, I will urge my MD Senators (Mikulski and Cardin) to support President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry and will urge them not to support his bid for Minority Leader, if his support of this bill continues.

I mentioned that if his support for RW GOPer legislation intended to sabotage the Iran framework continues, I will also urge Senator Reid to endorse another candidate for Minority Leader and will financially support a primary challenger against him. I mean what I say.

I urge everyone else who finds his support of this bill abominable to write to him at once. http://www.schumer.senate.gov/contact/email-chuck

Here is a copy of my letter to Senator Schumer:

Dear Senator Schumer:

I am writing to you to express, in the strongest possible terms, that your reported support of the "Corker bill" does not reflect the interests and desires of this constituent in any way whatsoever, nor of the vast majority of my fellow New York Democrats. Quite the contrary, we support the excellent work of our Democratic president and many others to build a realistic peace in the Middle East. Your support of this bill has the earmarks of a craven pandering to a small group of rightwing fanatics who last brought us the Iraq War and, apparently, would be happy to bring us a vastly more destructive, counterproductive, pointless and insane new war to add to the festering sore that is the result of their last adventure.

PLEASE STOP PANDERING TO THE MASTERS OF WAR!!!!!

Thanks you for your kind attention to the will of your constituents, as well as to the desire of the human race for survival.

Thank you so much. Because you are actually a constituent from New York, he and his staff will likely pay more attention to yours than to mine.

But the more letters Schumer gets from us all should begin to make him realize that he MUST stop pandering to the Masters of War, as you so well put it!

Our voices should be loud and clear to everyone, not simply to our own!

In fact - with your permission - I may lift parts of your letter to send to Corker, McConnell et al.

The worst they can do is to ignore us, and they probably will do that. But the more letters they receive from us, the more some may begin to realize how far they have gone over the cliff in their insane hatred of anything Prez Obama does.

And I agree, the more they hear the better!

clout? lack of real character? a yellow belly? and on and on ad nauseum........

what am I missing here?

Thanks to folks like Schumer

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/09/politics/senate-iran-bill-veto-obama/

Washington (CNN)Senate backers of a bill the White House fears could dismantle a potential nuclear deal with Iran are closing in on a veto-proof threshold of support.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is expected to approve the bill next Tuesday and hold a full Senate vote soon after. The measure provides a skeptical Congress with the opportunity to review the deal and prevents the president from waiving congressional sanctions on Iran during the review period.

But so far, the administration hasn't been able to win over all the Senate Democrats, many of whom believe strongly that Congress has a constitutional obligation to weigh in on a major nuclear agreement with a long-time enemy of the United States.

The bill already has nine Democratic co-sponsors and a handful of other Democrats have either expressed support or remain open to backing the bill. When combined with the Senate Republicans and one independent who support the legislation, that leaves backers just four shy of the 67 needed to sustain the veto that Obama has promised.