Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio may be providing a teachable moment for Senate Democrats.
House Republicans chucked leadership that performs poorly compared with Democrats and elected Jordan as minority leader on Nov. 10. The Democrats should do the same and jettison Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York.
Politics have realigned in states I did not expect to change this decade, a result that beats the 1974 midterm elections after Watergate. Democrats will soon control the Senate. They won in ruby-red states, blue states and swing states. In a matter of months, their party will have its grip on one of the most powerful institutions in the world.
If the Democratic Party truly wants to carry this momentum into 2028, it has to do something it has avoided
for years: Change its leadership in Congress. Schumer should not be elected Senate majority leader.
Democrats need a leader who knows where they're going
An NBC News poll taken just days before the election found that only 13% of registered voters view Schumer positively, while 53% view him negatively. That is not a leader responsible for creating a new wave – that is a leader enjoying the coattails of one. Even within his own party, Schumer is unpopular.
Judging by the Election Day results, Democratic voters want the party to keep its foot on the gas, but they need someone behind the wheel who knows where they’re going.
Ask yourself: When Schumer speaks, is he explaining where Democrats stand and articulating the policies Democrats want? Or is he meandering through general platitudes?
When current House Speaker Mike Johnson speaks, you already know what’s coming: a defense of President Donald Trump, blame the Democrats for something and maybe a strange detour into the Democratic Party’s history with the Ku Klux Klan.
It doesn’t really matter what Johnson says. What matters is that people know where the Republican Party stands through him. If Democrats want to keep the momentum, they need a leader who conveys the party’s vision for the country just by standing at the podium.
Speaking of podiums, Schumer stood at one on election night – glasses lowered, speaking softly down to the crowd as if addressing his grandchildren. Unfortunately for him, we are not Schumer’s grandchildren. We are adults with jobs, families and a real fear for the future of the country we love. Voters did not turn out to receive a gold star from party leadership for picking the winning side.
They turned out to reject Donald Trump and what the Republican Party stands for. That rejection of Trumpism will last only if the Democratic Party picks leaders who excite the base, offer a vision for the party and can spell out its priorities.
If you can’t sell the party’s future, you shouldn’t be leading it.
Brown shouldn't cling to his friendship with Schumer
The choice now falls to senators like Ohio’s Sherrod Brown and the newly elected class.
Brown is an institutionalist who served 18 years in the Senate, and Schumer personally recruited him to run this year. That history will make this decision harder.
Yet this vote is bigger than old friendships or political debts. It’s about whether the party that just won can tell voters what it stands for. If even Brown breaks with Schumer, the rest of the caucus will notice.
Who could replace Schumer? Try Van Hollen
For a replacement, Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland earned wide respect within the party when he traveled to El Salvador to visit Kilmar Abrego Garcia in 2025 after Immigration and Customs Enforcement deported him in violation of a court order.
In a Nov. 12 interview with MS Now, Van Hollen launched a challenge against Schumer to lead Senate Democrats.
Van Hollen has said Congress shouldn’t fund another dime of the unpopular Iran war, while Schumer will only say the power of the purse is one option.
That juxtaposition reveals Schumer is not even explicit about how the Democrats plan to end the war, a war that is historically unpopular. Incoming Democratic senators from Illinois, Kansas, Maine and Michigan have already said they won’t back Schumer, which leaves room for others to say the same.
Did Democrats win because their candidates were so strong, or because the Trump administration drove Republicans into a ditch they couldn’t climb out of?
Honestly, it’s probably both. But the fact that we’re even asking means party leadership never made the case for its own victory. If Schumer can’t message a win, then how do we expect him to message anything?
Most important, if Democrats don’t use this momentum and remove Schumer, Republicans will have time to move past Trump and have their own come-to-Jesus moment, remaking the party the way MAGA did in 2016.
Their 2028 nominee will stand for what Trump stands for but will be more articulate and more approachable – it’ll be MAGA under a new acronym and without Trump as its face.
So, it seems Jim Jordan may have a lesson for Sherrod Brown and other senators.
Matt Otto, a native of Geneva, Ohio, is a graduate student at the University of Kentucky’s Martin School of Public Policy and Administration. His work has been syndicated across the USA TODAY Network, and he has worked on several Democratic campaigns. This column originally appeared in the Columbus Dispatch.
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Jim Jordan shows Democrats how they've outgrown Chuck Schumer | Opinion
