Wolfgang Posted Tuesday at 10:20 PM Posted Tuesday at 10:20 PM 3 minutes ago, Che Guevara said: I think that the democrats just embarrassed and discredited themselves. By caving and agreeing to reopen the government without getting any of what they were asking for as the basis of the shutdown means that the democrats just took ownership of the entire shutdown. The democratic leadership just demonstrated itself to be completely incompetent. At the time of the shutdown, I could see the binary arguments that either side was at fault. The republicans were at fault because they are in the majority, controlling the executive and legislative branches of the government. The majority party sometimes needs votes from the minority party and, hence, they sometimes have to negotiate. The shutdown was one of the times that the republicans were being asked to negotiate and they simply said no. From a minority party position, to then say, "okay don't negotiate but you can't have the votes you need," is a reasonable position to stake. To the contrary, for the republicans to say, "we need 7 (turns out 8 votes) minority party votes to stay open and minority party is saying no so they own the shutdown," is also tangibly factually and the basis for why republicans could claim that the democrats were (are) responsible for the shutdown. I can or could see how both parties could blame the other (although I personally thought one party was definitely more responsible than the other). So, for the democrats to now decide to accept an offer that was floated weeks ago, demonstrates that the democrats were never sincere in the positions they staked (at least the leadership wasn't sincere) and have now essentially taken ownership of the entire shutdown. And, after elections that just showed potentially considerably republican vulnerabilities, the democrats have just triggered a decided political turn. I think that there is a real possibility that rank and file democrats will turn on the democratic leadership in DC. On the one hand, the democrats just set themselves back politically. On the other hand, this might just be the event that triggers a tea party like uprising in the democratic party and possibly reconfigures a democratic party that is desperately in need of a massive shakeup. For example, I think that any democratic primary candidate that does not distance themselves from or doesn't demand a change in leadership (aka., removing Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries) is going to have a hard time winning their primaries. I think that rank and file democrats feel betrayed by their leadership and this betrayal may come at a big political price. Maybe?
JDHillFan Posted Tuesday at 10:21 PM Posted Tuesday at 10:21 PM 6 minutes ago, Che Guevara said: (although I personally thought one party was definitely more responsible than the other). Why so spineless?
The Frankish Reich Posted Tuesday at 11:25 PM Posted Tuesday at 11:25 PM 1 hour ago, Che Guevara said: By caving and agreeing to reopen the government without getting any of what they were asking for as the basis of the shutdown means that the democrats just took ownership of the entire shutdown. They were never going to get their demands from Trump and the Republican Senate. The shutdown accomplished a couple things: it probably took Trump's approval down a tick or two and, more importantly, ensured that Democratic turnout would be higher in the VA/NJ races. I haven't seen specific language in the Senate deal, but if it includes a commitment that Thune will take an extension of Obamacare subsidies to a vote, AND if that somehow happens on the House side too, then the Dems make every Republican publicly vote on that specific issue, which they will use in the midterms. It is what it is. 1
B-Man Posted yesterday at 04:26 PM Author Posted yesterday at 04:26 PM The meaning of “shutdown” By Bill Glahn In the end (if this is the end) what was it all about? The record-long federal government shutdown (43 days, over six weeks) could end as early as tonight, if the House of Representatives goes along with the deal passed by the Senate on Monday. My theory is it all had to do with the odd-year elections in New Jersey and Virginia. A week later, everyone now believes that last Tuesday’s results were always inevitable: Democrat wins in two blue states Trump lost in every election. If you look at the Real Clear Politics (RCP) poll of polls for these races, a different story emerges. In New Jersey, the Republican candidate had dramatically cut the lead in the last seven days of September from a net -9 to a net -4.7 on September 30. A poll released by The Hill on September 25 had the race in a dead heat. The poll had the race at 43-43 with 11 percent undecided. Something dramatic had to happen to change the trajectory. The shutdown began on October 1. In early October, a texting scandal broke in Virginia involving the Democratic candidate for Attorney General, Jay Jones. Having had a large lead in the race to unseat the incumbent Republican, Jones immediately fell behind in the polls and remained behind for the entire month of October. Had the election been held a week earlier, Jones would have lost. But the shutdown dragged on, and the large federal workforce in Virginia eventually missed a paycheck. Add in the final weekend artificially-created SNAP “crisis” for good measure. In the event, Democrats won with big margins in both states, supported by suspiciously large odd-year election turnout. Afterward, Senate Democrats quickly moved to end the shutdown, having achieved zero (0) policy gains, but significant electoral ones. It may rank and the most cynical election tactic deployed in my lifetime. The lesson learned (for Democrats) is that shutdowns “work.” Look for a repeat immediately before the 2026 midterms to gin up the base and boost turnout. From Byron York, According to some accounts, the Democratic shutdown was kind of like a really long No Kings rally. You may not recall, but in the early days of October, you could not find two Democrats with a common understanding of what “shutdown” was about. The explanation started out as a broad effort to roll back 2025 Republican policy gains. Then it narrowed to a defense of a small, soon-to-expire, extra Covid-era Obamacare subsidy (on top of the regular massive Obamacare subsidies, which remain in place). https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2025/11/the-meaning-of-shutdown.php
Recommended Posts