2026-11-13 / CNN
民主党领导层的角逐在70多岁的查克与60多岁的克里斯之间展开，这很难让人联想到众多活动家所渴望的权力交接时刻。
但在美国参议院，”代际更迭”是个相对概念。
不过，马里兰州参议员克里斯·范霍伦挑战查克·舒迈尔对明年参议院民主党多数党领袖的领导权，其意义远超表象。首先，这表明民主党胜选的声势已在重塑该党。
“我们在选举日见证了一场声势浩大的民主觉醒。红州、蓝州、摇摆州概莫能外，”范霍伦在微软全国广播公司（MS NOW）节目中表示，他认为这次选举结果不只是对特朗普的反弹。”民众的诉求是彻底拒绝现状、拒绝按部就班的政治生态。要实现这一点，我认为我们需要新的领导力。”
明年将领导55名、可能多达56名民主党参议员的职责，将在与唐纳德·特朗普总统最后两年任期内的激烈博弈中起到关键作用。
这也不止是华盛顿特区范围内的人气较量。它暴露了民主党仍在消化这场令人震惊的中期选举大胜的意义，并在思考如何利用这一成果。此次角逐将展现意识形态、策略、政策等各方面的分歧，以及民主党新星们受挫的抱负——选举产生的执政联盟在理念和地域上的多样性远超任何人预期，这些因素在选举后进一步激化。这也表明，根基派与该党华盛顿领导层之间的矛盾将是2028年大选前的核心议题。
来自纽约的五任参议员舒迈尔是压倒性热门人选，他表示对自己能在12月1日的领导层选举中获胜充满信心。但与共和党现任多数党领袖约翰·图恩不同，图恩在共和党败选后仍顺利连任该党领袖，舒迈尔如今面临的领导权竞争，即便胜选也可能引发对其权威的质疑。
范霍伦已成为进步派及部分新晋民主党议员的意外寄托，这些议员希望获得更有活力的领导——至少希望推动舒迈尔采取更激进的姿态。范霍伦与舒迈尔的对决还将暴露该党内部围绕以色列问题的分歧：这位马里兰州参议员曾严厉批评以色列在加沙的行动，而舒迈尔长期以来一直是民主党中最直言不讳支持以色列政府的人士之一。
领导层对决的可能性在本周早些时候出现升温，当时进步派偶像伯尼·桑德斯参议员和温和务实派密歇根州参议员埃莉莎·斯洛特金在国会山举行联合记者会。
“我喜欢查克。没人比查克·舒迈尔工作更卖力……但在我看来，现在正是变革的时机，我不会支持查克连任民主党领袖，”身为独立人士但投票支持民主党、来自佛蒙特州的桑德斯说道。斯洛特金补充道：”我们需要新一代领导力。……桑德斯参议员和我在一些问题上存在分歧，但我们在变革的必要性上达成了共识。”
参议院权力是历经数十年积累的。但在反特朗普浪潮中当选的一批锐气十足的民主党新议员，并不受该机构的俱乐部式传统约束。舒迈尔已领导参议院民主党度过了十年的少数党与多数党时期。从定义上讲，他绝非变革的代表。许多活动家也认为，在特朗普第二任期的头两年，他表现过于被动。当一群民主党人加入共和党投票终止政府停摆，却未能争取到强化《平价医疗法案》补贴的延期时，他被指责背信弃义。
如今，参议院最激进的民主党人将中期选举的巨大胜利视为推动更广泛改革的契机。
“我无意否定舒迈尔参议员。他投入了大量精力助力构建我们未来两年将享有的多数党地位，”密歇根州当选参议员阿卜杜勒·埃勒-赛义德在周二接受美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）记者凯特兰·柯林斯采访时表示，”但我确实认为，这一时刻需要不同类型的领导力。当我的家乡州民众发声时，他们要求的是政治献金退出、口袋里多拿钱、全民医保。他们要的是行动。”
作为进步派人士，埃勒-赛义德或许觉得没有理由维护该党的建制派。他在激烈的初选中击败了曾被华盛顿领导层认为最有希望在11月胜选的众议员哈利·史蒂文斯。如今他支持范霍伦。
一些批评者认为，舒迈尔作为典型的纽约人，无法代表新多数党的地域广度——该党将迎来来自德克萨斯州、南卡罗来纳州、密西西比州、北卡罗来纳州和爱荷华州等此前共和党铁票州的新参议员。这些候选人在竞选时，既针对特朗普，也针对本党领导层和进步派的文化立场。因此，他们没有动力把投票支持舒迈尔作为在华盛顿的第一项行动。
密西西比州当选参议员斯科特·科洛姆在选举后接受微软全国广播公司（MS NOW）节目詹·萨基采访时表示，舒迈尔与假定的下任众议院民主党领袖哈基姆·杰弗里斯”住在同一个行政区”的情况并不理想。他补充道：”我们的领导人太多来自同一地区……我需要有人理解美国农村、理解我们的价值观、理解我们的需求。”
科洛姆的观点有道理。但国会是一个变革进程缓慢的机构，参议院尤其如此，议员任期为六年。从逻辑上讲，有理由让一批新当选的议员迅速进入领导岗位。但已获得提名资格的民主党人会提出异议。不过，如果该党希望取得成功，就需要找到一种方式，接纳那些助力其赢得多数席位的新生议员在文化和理念上的诉求。
参议院领导者最重要的特质是懂数人头的投票技巧。舒迈尔试图通过公开表示已掌握足够选票来平息民主党反叛的可能性。
“我有信心当选多数党领袖。我们的党团在聚焦降低成本、终结腐败、终结混乱、终结战争方面确实团结一心。我们党团内部凝聚力很强，”舒迈尔周二表示。周四晚间，他欢迎围绕理念展开竞争，并再次保证已获得足够选票。
他可能确实没错。民主党领导层选举采用无记名投票，这意味着参议员们可以公开表态支持或反对，但最终选择是他们自己的投票。这意味着参议员们可以通过公开表态反抗建制派来树立形象，同时私下承诺支持。
这场领导层竞争是舒迈尔漫长政治生涯末期的又一个棘手变数。进步派众议员亚历山大·奥卡西奥-科尔特斯可能在2028年初选挑战他的可能性，已经引发了关于他是否可能退休的猜测。
一些民主党人——尤其是那些在政坛混迹已久的人士——认为罢免舒迈尔作为领袖既不公平也不明智。”当带你们打进世界大赛的教练再次拿到合同时，你会欣然接受，”亚利桑那州参议员鲁本·加列戈本周表示。
来自纽约州的舒迈尔同僚、参议员克里斯汀·吉利布兰德表示，鉴于舒迈尔招募了一批出色的候选人并筹集了数亿美元资金支持他们，他应得到嘉奖。”正因如此，尽管存在诸多不满，人们对他为带领我们走到目前位置所付出的努力充满感激，”她说道。吉利布兰德还明确指出，她与舒迈尔一年前曾为科洛姆参加筹款活动。
参议院议事厅有着一套森严的规则，并非新手所能涉足。在民主党终于重掌权力之际爆发的激烈内部斗争，只会坐实该党自我瓦解的名声。
而且一些变革诉求可能根本无法实现。即便民主党打破参议院传统、废除需要60票才能通过多数重大立法的议事阻挠规则，仍会遭遇特朗普的否决。他们最好的策略或许是采取长期规划，为2028年赢回白宫并维持国会多数席位做好准备。
但这无法安抚那些要求立即变革的声音。
因此，舒迈尔很可能再次当选参议院多数党领袖。但到2028年之后，要求更换新鲜血液的呼声或许将变得不可抗拒。
Senate leadership showdown could fracture Democratic post-election unity
2026-11-13 / CNN
A Democratic leadership tilt between a 70-something Chuck and a 60-something Chris hardly screams of the torch-passing moment many activists crave.
But in the US Senate, “generational change” is a relative term.
Still, Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen’s challenge to Sen. Chuck Schumer’s leadership of next year’s Senate Democratic majority is more significant than it might seem. To start with, it suggests that the magnitude of the Democratic triumph is already changing the party.
“We saw a huge outburst of democracy on Election Day. Red states, blue states, purple states,” Van Hollen said on MS Now, arguing that the result went deeper than an anti-Trump backlash. “The call was really to reject the status quo and to reject business as usual. And to do that, I think we need new leadership.”
The role of leading 55 and possibly 56 Democratic senators next year will be crucial in what is already shaping up as a vicious tussle with President Donald Trump during his final two years in office.
This is also more than a Beltway popularity contest. It reveals a party still digesting the meaning of its shockingly broad midterm election victory and working out what to do with it. The contest will showcase disputes over ideology, tactics, policy and the frustrated aspirations of Democratic rising stars, which intensified after the election produced a governing coalition that is far more philosophically and geographically diverse than anyone expected. And it shows that tensions between the base and the party’s Washington leaders will be a leitmotif of the run-up to the 2028 election.
Schumer, a five-term senator from New York, is a strong favorite, and says he’s confident that he will win the leadership election on December 1. But unlike his Republican counterpart, current Majority Leader John Thune, who was swiftly reelected to head his party despite the GOP defeat, Schumer will now face a leadership race that could raise questions about his authority even if he wins.
Van Hollen has emerged as a surprise vessel for progressives and some newer members of the incoming Democratic minority who want more dynamic leadership — or at least want to push Schumer toward a more aggressive posture. A Van Hollen vs. Schumer showdown will also lay bare the divide over Israel wracking the party. The Maryland senator has harshly criticized Israel’s operation in Gaza, while Schumer has long been one of the Israeli government’s most outspoken supporters in the Democratic Party.
The prospect of a leadership face-off gained momentum earlier this week when Sen. Bernie Sanders, a progressive icon, and Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin, a moderate pragmatist, held a joint Capitol Hill news conference.
“I like Chuck. Nobody … works harder than Chuck Schumer. But in my view, the time is now for change and I will not be supporting Chuck to be reelected as the Democratic leader,” said Sanders, a Vermont independent who votes with Democrats. Slotkin added: “We need a new generation of leadership … Senator Sanders and I disagree on some items, but we agree on the need for change.”
Senate power is accrued over decades. But a brash new intake of Democrats elected in an anti-Trump backlash is immune from the chamber’s clubby traditions. Schumer has led Senate Democrats through minority and majority periods for a decade. By definition, he’s hardly an avatar of change. Many activists also believe he was too passive in the first two years of Trump’s second term. He was accused of betrayal when a group of Democrats joined Republicans in voting to end a government shutdown without securing their demands for an extension of enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies.
Now, the most progressive Democrats in the Senate view the massive midterms triumph as the moment to push for far more expansive reforms.
“I don’t want to take anything away from Senator Schumer. He’s put a lot of effort into helping to architect the majority that we are going to enjoy in the next two years,” Michigan Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins on Tuesday. “But I do think that this moment calls for a different kind of leadership. When my state spoke up, they were asking for money out of politics, money in your pocket, Medicare for All. They wanted action.”
El-Sayed, a progressive, may see little reason to shield the party’s establishment. He won a bitter primary against Rep. Haley Stevens, who Washington leaders had viewed as best placed to win in November. Now he’s backing Van Hollen.
Some critics see Schumer, as a quintessential New Yorker, as unrepresentative of the geographical sweep of the new majority, which will welcome new senators from previously red states like Texas, South Carolina, Mississippi, North Carolina and Iowa. Such candidates ran as much against their own party’s leadership and the cultural positions of progressives as against Trump. They’ve got little incentive, then, to make a vote for Schumer their first act in Washington.
New Mississippi Sen.-elect Scott Colom told Jen Psaki on MS NOW after the election that it was hardly ideal that both Schumer and the presumed next Democratic Speaker Hakeem Jeffries “live in the same borough.” He added: “Too many our leaders are from the same areas of the country. … I want someone who understands rural America, understands our values, understands our needs.”
Colom has a point. But Congress is an institution that processes change slowly. That’s especially true in the Senate, where members serve six-year terms. Logically, there’s a case for fast-tracking a member of the new intake straight into a leadership post. But Democrats already in line would complain. Still, if the party hopes to succeed, it will need to find a way to accommodate cultural and ideological priorities of the freshmen who delivered its large majorities.
The most important quality in a Senate leader is a flair for counting votes. And Schumer sought to tamp down the possibility of a Democratic revolt by publicly expressing assurance that he has them.
“I’m confident I will be elected majority leader. And our caucus is really united in focusing on bringing down costs, on ending the corruption, on ending the chaos, on ending the war. We have great unity in our caucus,” Schumer said Tuesday. On Thursday evening, he welcomed a contest of ideas and repeated his assurance that he had the votes.
He may be exactly right. Secret voting for the Democratic leadership will mean that senators can say what they like publicly — but their choice will be between them and the ballot box. This means that senators could make a show of standing up to the establishment while offering private assurances of support.
The leadership contest is another unwelcome twist late in Schumer’s long career. The possibility that he could face a primary challenge in 2028 from progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has already fueled speculation about his possible retirement.
Some Democrats — especially those who’ve been around for a while — argue that dumping Schumer as leader would be unfair and unwise. “When the manager takes you to the World Series, you give him another contract,” Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego said this week.
Schumer’s fellow Empire State senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, said he should be rewarded for recruiting a great class of candidates and raising hundreds of millions of dollars to back them. “That is why you will see, despite all the grumblings, enormous gratitude for the hard work he has done to get us to this position,” she said. Gillibrand also pointedly noted that she and Schumer took part in a fundraiser a year ago for Colom.
The Senate chamber, with its impenetrable codes, is no place for rookie. A bitter internal fight right at the moment when Democrats finally won back power would only confirm the party’s reputation for self-sabotage.
And some demands for change may be simply undeliverable. Even if Democrats were to shatter Senate tradition by eliminating the filibuster that requires 60 votes for most major legislation, they’d still run in to Trump’s veto. Their best bet may be a long game that positions them to win back the White House and maintain their congressional majorities in 2028.
But that won’t placate vocal demands for immediate change.
So it’s quite possible that Schumer will become Senate majority leader again. But after 2028, calls for fresh leadership may become irresistible.
发表回复