There is a diary on the recommended list urging people to help remove Harry Reid from power. The argument being that, since he is not responsive to the will of the Democratic voters, he should be replaced with someone who is.
I agree. But the diarist's prescription for solving this problem (replacing Harry Reid) misses something huge: Reid is Majority Leader because the Senate Democratic caucus likes him as Majority Leader.
What people often forget when discussing the "failings" of caucus leaders is that caucus leaders do not represent the interests of the wider movement that elects that caucus. The leadership's constituents are not the Democratic voters. The leadership's constituents are the other members of the caucus.
That's why Nancy Pelosi, a liberal Democrat from a liberal district, had to be more moderate in her approaches to managing the caucus in the previous congressional term. She didn't just represent San Francisco. She also represent the Democratic congress people from the South. When the issue of impeachment came up last time, she couldn't just advocate for it because the people in her district supported it. She couldn't just advocate for it because Democrats as a whole supported it. If a significant portion of her caucus was against it, then she couldn't do it.
This is is also why caucuses generally elect leadership that comes from more swing states. A member from a more conservative state will feel more comfortable having a leader from a more conservative state because they know that that leader will be less likely to let their liberal constituents push the caucus in a way that isn't in line with the more conservative member's district. The fact that Pelosi got elected at all is a testament to her ability to persuade her colleagues that she won't let the fact that she comes from San Francisco dominate her legislative agenda.
Demanding the defeat of Harry Reid is pointless if the caucus as a whole will just elect another leader in the same vein. If you really want to change the leadership of the caucus then you need to change the caucus itself. You do this by either persuading its members to vote differently, or you elect new members who will vote differently.
Reid's "spinelessness" is just a symptom.