Great idea Ro! Another progressive litmus test! And when the progressive who passes the litmus test becomes the Democratic presidential nominee (which is what Ro aspires to) and gets bludgeoned by Republican attack ads showing photos of the murdered Laken Riley and her bereaved family juxtaposed with the convicted murderer (an illegal immigrant who had previously been arrested several times), and President Vance or President Rubio is sworn in on Jan. 20th 2027, I'm sure we'll all feel better that we stuck to Ro's litmus test.
I will vote for anyone who is pro democracy, and not maga.
Politicians during Trump mostly Republicans have been horribly cowardly, some Democrats too.
Some senators may not be senators if they didn't vote in those ways.
I have actually always thought that Ro khanna representing " silicone Valley, is a bit too close to gigantic tech money... I mean how can he not be.
He has been loud, I appreciate that. He has been effective I appreciate that. And yes maybe those senators will have to defend their votes, but I don't think it disqualify them from 2028.
Rep. Khanna is on point, see him with a governor as a potential VP candidate ticket I would support. Issue for USA is whether this period of American self-mutilation will end and a long hopeful restitution can be effectually implemented! The issues of 'citizens united' and many other Robert's led partisan hack scotus rulings have placed the country in an ever diminishing position to move in a positive direction.
Sens. John Fetterman, Ruben Gallego, Mark Kelly, Catherine Cortez Masto, Jacky Rosen, Jon Ossoff, Raphael Warnock, Gary Peters, and Elissa Slotkin.
So we have 4 groups - Fetterman, a group unto himself; AZ/NV - a group that understandably has immigration at the top of the list; GA - the slightest of swing states, with two senators understandably trying to innoculate themselves in their home races; and then Michigan - where there is no explanation and is totally inexcusable. Ro’s criticism applies with the most force to these two. Peters is befuddling bc what was he doing other than providing Cover for Slotkin;
The Iraq war vote was not disqualifying. Hillary voted for the war, and was nominated by the party for president. She won the popular vote by three million votes. The reason she lost the EV had nothing to do with the Iraq war, and everything to do with how unlikeable she is. The only person who ultimately paid a price for the Iraq war vote was George W. Bush.
Apparently a lot of Democrats find her unlikable, as enough of them stayed home in the “blue wall” states to make Trump president. If she’s so likeable, then why did a “not Hillary” always emerge on your side when she was the “inevitable” nominee? See Obama, Barrack and Sanders, Bernie? She lost one nomination to a black first term Senator, and almost lost another to an obscure cranky old backbencher from Vermont. Finally, anyone who thinks Hillary is not awful and corrupt is the brainwashed one.
There's nothing inherently unlikeable about Hillary Clinton. You've just been brainwashed to believe that there is. Your username and your bio give you away. Democrats don't want to take your money or your "privilege". Grow the fuck up.
As much as Khanna’s handling of the Epstein files was laudable, his attacking Democratic presidential hopefuls is troubling. It’s the same playbook Bernie Sanders used in 2016, and it was one of the reasons of Hillary lost, and Trump won.
The moral purity tactic works well with young, idealistic voters, but every politician makes mistakes or simply has to vote a certain way depending on the voters he represents. For example, Khanna has been careful not to talk trash about Silicone Valley because, that’s where his district is.
It will be interesting to see how Khanna handles the story in the NYT that Platner, the progressive candidate for Senator, was exchanging multiple sexual texts with women, other than his wife not long after they were married. Progressives let it be known they were furious with Democrats for not doing a better job of policing their party members after the revelations about Eric Swalwell came out.
I agree with you about Khanna. But I do see a big distinction between Swalwell and his unwanted advances and Platner, who as far I have read, was exchanging text messages with women who were actively participating. To me, that’s an issue that’s between him and his wife, who said they were in counseling.
It is strange to me that there is a litmus test for this vote (as unsound as the vote was) for the act, from a guy whose wife heavily invested in Palantir.
Khanna is a leading voice in Dem party now. Since he's from and represents Silicon Valley I think he's got his finger on the pulse of the techbros. I just hope he doesn't sink to their level building and funding a campaign for his next move. I admire and respect him for all he's done so far, especially for the Epstein victims. He's got a great future ahead, even if not running for president. A good man, effective legislator, like Thomas Massie.
I live in California and am deeply disappointed in Ro Khanna and his endorsement and support of Tom Steyer. Steyer has spent over 200 million buying the California election. Progressives like Khanna are enthralled with their pet oligarch billionaire. Steyer is purchasing endorsements just as he is paying online influencers to change opinions about him which is in violation of California law not to disclose payments. The hypocrisy of the progressive left and Khanna has disqualified him for higher office and my vote.
I like Khanna a lot, but I disagree that support for the Laken Rilley act is a disqualifier. We have to allow room in the party for areas of reasonable disagreement. I believe this act falls in that bucket. It’s going to be a very hard position to take that government cannot detain an illegal immigrant who has been arrested for a crime.
Khanna's complaints about swing district Democrats are misplaced but his focus on corporate leadership is spot on. And it's not just tech CEOs who need to show a little spine. Media and financial services are two other sectors whose top execs have enabled, or at least ignored, this administration's cruelty, racism and disrespect for the law.
The problem is not the Laken Riley Act. The problem is that Democrats have no coherent plan for immigration that embodies our values, supplies the economy with much needed workers, and maintains control of the border and the rule of law. (Part of embodying our values will be retiring Laken Riley.) It’s not enough to deplore Trump’s handling of immigration. We’ve already won that rhetorical battle. For voters to trust Democrats with the car keys they need to know what kind of immigration policies Democrats favor, including enforcement, and not just hear Democrats complain about how mean the Republicans are.
100%. Laken Riley is not the problem Dems have with this issue: the perennial political hot potato neither party seems willing to commit to fixing. R's don't really want to, in any rational way. While Dems have too often been out to lunch. Biden tried to be the opposite of immigrant-hostile Trump, but took his foot off the gas too completely. And the flood gates whooshed. IMO, this issue was at least 75% of what sank the Dems in 2024. The other 25% being a guy who couldn't be the one term president he'd promised to be. And his successor blasted out of the gate at full speed, but then faded in the critical home stretch, leaving voters bereft and bewildered. "What?? What the hell is going on here? We need the strong convincing person to vote for. Who is this person we just met 10 weeks ago?"
I don't know a lot about the Laken Riley act specifics and I have a generally favorable opinion of Ro Khanna but moreso of folks like Ruben Gallegos, Mark Kelly and Raphael Warnock.
I think it's one thing to take a principled courageous stance on behalf of a class of people but the courage doesn't shine thru as much if you're in a more protected district vs. being in a purple district. In a purple district there's a heavier lift to convince at least some of your constitutents to step outside of entrenched views.
I guess what would count for me is how much work is each candidate putting in to convince enough voters on the other side of the aisle to support the Dem position on fixing the immigration system. It requires understanding such voters who would favor the Laken Riley act and being able to translate your proposal into their language to some degree so they hear what you are saying and can face it squarely.
Even though Democrats and Republicans both speak English I think there are ways in which the two sides often just speak past each other, as if they have different languages, like using the same words but different connotations.
Convincing the other side to support your position requires a sort of leadership quality - it is bold for Ro Khanna to stake out the territory he has, I give him some credit for that. But it comes with a heavy lift to convince enough of the rest of America to go along with him. I don't know if he's well poised in Silicon Valley to persuade Republican and Independent voters to support the Dem plans for immigration reform, better than someone from a purple district who deals with border issues more often - I'll be interested to see how it goes.
Do you like having two Democratic senators from Georgia? I sure do. I never thought I’d see it. I don’t give a rat’s behind over how they voted on any particular bill.
With all due respect, congressman, STFU. I love it when reps who come from massively safe districts make believe they’re profiles in courage on these votes. So by all means, let’s “disqualify“ Kelly, Ossoff, Warnock … Just put a sock in it, Ro.
I don't think that the Democrats should even be THINKING, let alone talking, about disqualifying anyone in May of 2026 for the next Presidential election, but if I thought that anyone should be considered for that now, it would be Ro Khanna for being the first big name to try to organize the kickoff Democratic Circular Firing Squad of the upcoming cycle.
He should know better, and the worst part of it is, he does.
Great idea Ro! Another progressive litmus test! And when the progressive who passes the litmus test becomes the Democratic presidential nominee (which is what Ro aspires to) and gets bludgeoned by Republican attack ads showing photos of the murdered Laken Riley and her bereaved family juxtaposed with the convicted murderer (an illegal immigrant who had previously been arrested several times), and President Vance or President Rubio is sworn in on Jan. 20th 2027, I'm sure we'll all feel better that we stuck to Ro's litmus test.
I will vote for anyone who is pro democracy, and not maga.
Politicians during Trump mostly Republicans have been horribly cowardly, some Democrats too.
Some senators may not be senators if they didn't vote in those ways.
I have actually always thought that Ro khanna representing " silicone Valley, is a bit too close to gigantic tech money... I mean how can he not be.
He has been loud, I appreciate that. He has been effective I appreciate that. And yes maybe those senators will have to defend their votes, but I don't think it disqualify them from 2028.
Rep. Khanna is on point, see him with a governor as a potential VP candidate ticket I would support. Issue for USA is whether this period of American self-mutilation will end and a long hopeful restitution can be effectually implemented! The issues of 'citizens united' and many other Robert's led partisan hack scotus rulings have placed the country in an ever diminishing position to move in a positive direction.
Sens. John Fetterman, Ruben Gallego, Mark Kelly, Catherine Cortez Masto, Jacky Rosen, Jon Ossoff, Raphael Warnock, Gary Peters, and Elissa Slotkin.
So we have 4 groups - Fetterman, a group unto himself; AZ/NV - a group that understandably has immigration at the top of the list; GA - the slightest of swing states, with two senators understandably trying to innoculate themselves in their home races; and then Michigan - where there is no explanation and is totally inexcusable. Ro’s criticism applies with the most force to these two. Peters is befuddling bc what was he doing other than providing Cover for Slotkin;
The Iraq war vote was not disqualifying. Hillary voted for the war, and was nominated by the party for president. She won the popular vote by three million votes. The reason she lost the EV had nothing to do with the Iraq war, and everything to do with how unlikeable she is. The only person who ultimately paid a price for the Iraq war vote was George W. Bush.
Apparently a lot of Democrats find her unlikable, as enough of them stayed home in the “blue wall” states to make Trump president. If she’s so likeable, then why did a “not Hillary” always emerge on your side when she was the “inevitable” nominee? See Obama, Barrack and Sanders, Bernie? She lost one nomination to a black first term Senator, and almost lost another to an obscure cranky old backbencher from Vermont. Finally, anyone who thinks Hillary is not awful and corrupt is the brainwashed one.
There's nothing inherently unlikeable about Hillary Clinton. You've just been brainwashed to believe that there is. Your username and your bio give you away. Democrats don't want to take your money or your "privilege". Grow the fuck up.
As much as Khanna’s handling of the Epstein files was laudable, his attacking Democratic presidential hopefuls is troubling. It’s the same playbook Bernie Sanders used in 2016, and it was one of the reasons of Hillary lost, and Trump won.
The moral purity tactic works well with young, idealistic voters, but every politician makes mistakes or simply has to vote a certain way depending on the voters he represents. For example, Khanna has been careful not to talk trash about Silicone Valley because, that’s where his district is.
It will be interesting to see how Khanna handles the story in the NYT that Platner, the progressive candidate for Senator, was exchanging multiple sexual texts with women, other than his wife not long after they were married. Progressives let it be known they were furious with Democrats for not doing a better job of policing their party members after the revelations about Eric Swalwell came out.
I agree with you about Khanna. But I do see a big distinction between Swalwell and his unwanted advances and Platner, who as far I have read, was exchanging text messages with women who were actively participating. To me, that’s an issue that’s between him and his wife, who said they were in counseling.
While I get your point, to me it’s about a serious character flaw. The sexting thing is only one of many red flags.
I don’t believe in these litmus tests. One vote is a data point, that is all. A self-serving data point for Khanna.
It is strange to me that there is a litmus test for this vote (as unsound as the vote was) for the act, from a guy whose wife heavily invested in Palantir.
Khanna is a leading voice in Dem party now. Since he's from and represents Silicon Valley I think he's got his finger on the pulse of the techbros. I just hope he doesn't sink to their level building and funding a campaign for his next move. I admire and respect him for all he's done so far, especially for the Epstein victims. He's got a great future ahead, even if not running for president. A good man, effective legislator, like Thomas Massie.
I live in California and am deeply disappointed in Ro Khanna and his endorsement and support of Tom Steyer. Steyer has spent over 200 million buying the California election. Progressives like Khanna are enthralled with their pet oligarch billionaire. Steyer is purchasing endorsements just as he is paying online influencers to change opinions about him which is in violation of California law not to disclose payments. The hypocrisy of the progressive left and Khanna has disqualified him for higher office and my vote.
I like Khanna a lot, but I disagree that support for the Laken Rilley act is a disqualifier. We have to allow room in the party for areas of reasonable disagreement. I believe this act falls in that bucket. It’s going to be a very hard position to take that government cannot detain an illegal immigrant who has been arrested for a crime.
Khanna's complaints about swing district Democrats are misplaced but his focus on corporate leadership is spot on. And it's not just tech CEOs who need to show a little spine. Media and financial services are two other sectors whose top execs have enabled, or at least ignored, this administration's cruelty, racism and disrespect for the law.
The problem is not the Laken Riley Act. The problem is that Democrats have no coherent plan for immigration that embodies our values, supplies the economy with much needed workers, and maintains control of the border and the rule of law. (Part of embodying our values will be retiring Laken Riley.) It’s not enough to deplore Trump’s handling of immigration. We’ve already won that rhetorical battle. For voters to trust Democrats with the car keys they need to know what kind of immigration policies Democrats favor, including enforcement, and not just hear Democrats complain about how mean the Republicans are.
100%. Laken Riley is not the problem Dems have with this issue: the perennial political hot potato neither party seems willing to commit to fixing. R's don't really want to, in any rational way. While Dems have too often been out to lunch. Biden tried to be the opposite of immigrant-hostile Trump, but took his foot off the gas too completely. And the flood gates whooshed. IMO, this issue was at least 75% of what sank the Dems in 2024. The other 25% being a guy who couldn't be the one term president he'd promised to be. And his successor blasted out of the gate at full speed, but then faded in the critical home stretch, leaving voters bereft and bewildered. "What?? What the hell is going on here? We need the strong convincing person to vote for. Who is this person we just met 10 weeks ago?"
I don't know a lot about the Laken Riley act specifics and I have a generally favorable opinion of Ro Khanna but moreso of folks like Ruben Gallegos, Mark Kelly and Raphael Warnock.
I think it's one thing to take a principled courageous stance on behalf of a class of people but the courage doesn't shine thru as much if you're in a more protected district vs. being in a purple district. In a purple district there's a heavier lift to convince at least some of your constitutents to step outside of entrenched views.
I guess what would count for me is how much work is each candidate putting in to convince enough voters on the other side of the aisle to support the Dem position on fixing the immigration system. It requires understanding such voters who would favor the Laken Riley act and being able to translate your proposal into their language to some degree so they hear what you are saying and can face it squarely.
Even though Democrats and Republicans both speak English I think there are ways in which the two sides often just speak past each other, as if they have different languages, like using the same words but different connotations.
Convincing the other side to support your position requires a sort of leadership quality - it is bold for Ro Khanna to stake out the territory he has, I give him some credit for that. But it comes with a heavy lift to convince enough of the rest of America to go along with him. I don't know if he's well poised in Silicon Valley to persuade Republican and Independent voters to support the Dem plans for immigration reform, better than someone from a purple district who deals with border issues more often - I'll be interested to see how it goes.
Do you like having two Democratic senators from Georgia? I sure do. I never thought I’d see it. I don’t give a rat’s behind over how they voted on any particular bill.
With all due respect, congressman, STFU. I love it when reps who come from massively safe districts make believe they’re profiles in courage on these votes. So by all means, let’s “disqualify“ Kelly, Ossoff, Warnock … Just put a sock in it, Ro.
I don't think that the Democrats should even be THINKING, let alone talking, about disqualifying anyone in May of 2026 for the next Presidential election, but if I thought that anyone should be considered for that now, it would be Ro Khanna for being the first big name to try to organize the kickoff Democratic Circular Firing Squad of the upcoming cycle.
He should know better, and the worst part of it is, he does.