Thats a great ad campaign from Vote Vets. Exactly what the Democrats need to be doing. We should be HAMMERING the GOP on cuts to veterans services, cuts to Social Security customer service, National Parks not opening or being staffed this summer, etc etc.
Basically ANYTHING but fighting tooth and nail to save USAID. I think USAID does many great things and foreign aid is a crucial part of American soft power projection. But it does little to connect with the median voter in the heartland.
Focus on kitchen table issues and the tangible damage the Musk/Trump administration is doing to real actual everyday service delivery.
They tell themselves, "Well, we can't save the whole world," and then shrug it off. It's the Titanic lifeboat mentality. Hit the hands of the people trying to get into your boat which might cause it to tip.
I also think most people are basically good and would be against that IF THEY WERE CONVINCED IT WAS TRUE. But the median R voter in America is informationally agnostic and. easily misled by more persuasive and motivated peers and family acquaintances. I'm sorry but you could never get that message through to them.
Schumer didn't read the room. He was being told to fight, to make things difficult and he chicken out. The outcomes were shit either way, and he chose to cower than stand tall and be a fighter.
At least if Schumer stayed strong, it would have brought the issue to the American public. This wholesale takeover of the government could have been addressed and explained to the masses, while the MSM has been busy ignoring the issue and longterm repercussions of these policies; normalizing this spectacle and Trump’s unconstitutional actions.
Now we have no leverage, and Trump will continue to lay waste to the government with impunity. Congress just seeded all authority, including any possibility of reining in Trump and ludicrous Tariff agenda.
Bottom line: Democrats are now COMPLICIT, with 11 democratic senators and congressmen, making the CR a bi-partisan affair.
Personally, I think it was his WS and AIPAC buddies who convinced Schumer to lay down. The same people who couldn’t give a rats ass about our democracy; just tax cuts and deregulation. And in AIPAC’s case, 100% fealty to Israel; even with extremists in charge. IMHO…:)
Fair enough, but the image is of the Weimar Republic; circa 1933. Schumer is Franz von Papen (Chancellor of Germany in 1932), to Biden’s Hindenburg (President of the Weimar Republic).
Both Hindenburg (feeble and weak) and Papen (in over his head), believed they could rein in Hitler, and bring him to heel. Instead, Hitler became Chancellor in 53 days, and the rest is history. Trump’s coup will be a close second. IMHO!…:)
The American voter, especially those not particularly attached to any sort of ideological or partisan mooring, is desperate for a politician with a single shit to give.
Not only did Schumer not have one single shit to give for people losing for leadership, he abandoned his own caucus.
When furloughed government employees think about how the Dems stood up to Trump & Musk, are they going to remember the 260 Dems who stood up for them? Or are they going to remember Chuck & the 10 who let Musk rampage his chainsaw across the government?
JVL wrote a great piece on the policy implications of Schemer's massive fold. But The politics of this are off the charts bad.
Schumer's mistake was he thought there would be something he could salvage that he could claim as the scrap of a win. There was nothing that qualified. The outcomes were all bad. regardless of what he did. However, he should not have given up the fight just because defeat was inevitable.
It’s true. He should have taken numerous shots at MAGA. But he’s just constitutionally incapable of bringing it in the way that’s needed, anyway. It’s an understatement to say he’s not media savvy. He really should step aside.
Yes, Schumer’s mistake. Should have stood up? Yes. Filibustered? I don’t know. But I’m also not sure those fired (rehired?) federal employees care to make Schumer as big a villain as the pundits do. 230 Dems may have voted their (employees’) way … but they didn’t raise their voices either.
My dad died this past November and my mom, brother, and I have such mixed feelings, we miss him every day but are also so happy that he's not here to see this, because it would do him in. Almost every older person I know is saying things like "I'm glad I'm old and will die soon" because this is so heartbreaking. My mom was always sad that she's not a grandmother, and now she's talking about how grateful she is to not have grandchildren because she finds the world so distressing she would just be constantly sick for them.
I'm a childless cat lady but have had numerous conversations with my brother, who I trust, about how there may be a time I put everything in his name out of fear that women won't be allowed any assets or property or even income of their own......
Oh there is nothing "right" about it, it's crazy and terrifying and disgustingly gross that we have to even have these conversations! Women in no other first world nation have to worry about this and here we are just going backwards in that hand basket to hell........
As another codger, I tend to agree. (I'm more old fart than codger.) There have been times republics have sprung back. Greece had a civil war in the '40s Spain's installed Franco the decade before. Portugal was authoritarian. I'm not optimistic, there's still hope if we can figure out what buttons to push.
i believe that regulated market capitalism combined with democracy is the best system humanity has yet evolved, so i sincerely hope that my long-term pessimism is proven wrong....
I am only 41 and I don’t even expect it to be undone in my lifetime. I am weighing if it makes sense to just cut my losses and jump ship. I’d gladly stay and fight, but not by myself. Even the protests that have happened so far seem to be more about making the protestors feel better about themselves rather than pressuring the government. Protest movements that do not make demands, do not have a clear agenda, do not escalate or build upon previous actions, and do not focus on recruitment are simply for show.
I'd refer you to the tale of the scorpion and the frog - we knew Trump was poison long before the American people let him hitch a ride. So far, the only thing that's surprised me is: (1) Trump's attempt to seek retribution on a number of white shoe law firms solely for representing clients he dislikes; and (2) the fact so many voters pulled the lever for Trump because they *didn't* believe the statements he made on the campaign trail.
I know this comment will not be popular with a lot of the Bulwark community, but I think the 'I don't believe he will really do that' AND 'the price of eggs' reasons for voting for Trump were convenient excuses (that were reinforced by the media as rational, too) because they could not fathom the idea of a black woman as president.
Ogles thinks that Judge Boasberg needs to recuse himself from hearing cases based on the Alien Enemies Act because his wife gave $11k to Democratic candidates? How does he feel about Justice Thomas not recusing himself from Harlan Crow's cases?
It looks like the GOP has gone full fascist now, something that seemed impossible 10 years ago. Also, Schumer will never, ever, ever live this down and should probably just resign at this point. (Good riddance)
HORRIBLY false perspective. Yes, the GOP is neofascist. Biden, Harris and Walz already told us so. And it's BECAUSE they are fascists that Schumer absolutely made the right decision. This CR vote was not a normal policy vote. Obviously, the bill is horrible - as Schumer himself explained. But in this case, contrary to all pro-democracy US presidents (Democratic and Republicans), Trump and Musk WANTED a government shutdown. Because that's the only thing that would legalize what they're doing to America's democratic institutions. And history has proven that it takes decades to rebuild them.
Schumer decided to NOT cave and stand up against Trump, by passing the CR bill, which essentially makes it illegal for Musk and Trump to destroy the government. That was the ONLY wise decision to make.
What makes you believe that it is possible to stop them? "We the people" took away all political power from Democrats, on all political levels. That basically means that NO ONE can STOP them. All that we can do is slow down the destruction, so that when Democrats can take over, the rebuilding of democratic institutions hopefully can take place fast enough - which means: hopefully people will understand that during the restoration, no public services will be available yet, so they'll have to continue to vote for Democrats until it's done and we can start focusing on policy again.
That, in and of itself, is already taking a huge risk. Deliberately speeding up this destruction, as the shutdown would have done, would have made its restoration in the future virtually impossible. And that is the ONLY thing that still matters today.
Unfortunately, history is replete with authoritarian take-overs that succeeded despite opposition. But each time we don't fight, it makes it easier for them and creates a propaganda vaccuum that Trump/Musk are happy to fill.
With all respect, you're not getting it. Fighting back IS what Schumer did. A shutdown would have done 100% what Musk and Trump wanted, namely allowing them to legally destroy all democratic institutions, and much faster than what is the case today and will be the case tomorrow.
For argument's sake, I'm willing to stipulate that Schumer's vote was the least bad of a "Hobson's Choice". But it was too polite. Make noise and attack boldly and impolitely even with a losing hand. Stunts are ok and even necessary. Trump did a gazillion stunts and it only helped him. Schumer's job includes doing any and everything to get a strong message out. He does not seem to understand that. It's not just about legislating; it's about constant messaging attacks against Trump/Musk etc, using as big a megaphone as possible. There is no real sense from him that this situation is a genuine 5-alarm fire, and that we have to throw everything at it. R's are flooding the zone, we are not providing any counterfire of even comparable force/passion/defiant spirit.
It's "we the people's" job to "make noise". It's a lawmaker's job to focus on lawmaking - and in this case, to slow down the installation of fascism, which is the only legal power "we the people" gave Schumer in the first place.
I couldn't disagree more with the entire "messaging" framework that is so often applied to Democrats. The media (even most online media) no longer do their job at all, and it's THEIR job to make sure that everyone knows who does what why in DC.
The arrival of fascism in the US made people falsely imagine that somehow, it would be possible, as pro-democracy politicians, to set up a propaganda machine as powerful as what fascist do. It's impossible. That propaganda machine is so powerful precisely because fascist politicians don't govern, so they don't need to focus 24/7 on their job, and because they vitally need lies and stirring up anger, which is VERY easy to do.
What Democrats need is a thriving media landscape that explains 24/7 what the complexity of the issues at hand is, what options are on the table, what the history of these issues is, etc. No politician can ever pack this kind of complexity into pleasing soundbites. So we HAVE to get off our social media addiction and do the media's work ourselves, I'm afraid. Because there is no other option available today.
Conclusion: whenever a fascist party gets democratically elected, the main cause is the extremely low political literacy of vast chunks of the people (not just of those voting against fascists but the people in general). Now, all the people want is sentiment and outrage, no rational thinking or even just calmly explaining things at all anymore. THAT is when the problem starts. And we'll only get our democracy back the day a substantial number of citizens accepts that THIS is how democracy works and start doing their homework. As history has shown, over and over again...
There is a whole generation that only know Trump and Biden as presidents. How can they go back to something they have no memory of? They have to be reached in the media that they actually consume. I wish it weren't true, but we are in a life-or-death battle for attention.
You could be correct here, but if that is the case, Schumer did not explain it forcefully enough. He said the words, yes, but not in a way that was even really believable.
A democracy is only a government FOR the people if it's a democracy BY the people. We urgently need to treat real, sincere, hard-working politicians as normal people, and then do OUR job as citizens, which is to inform ourselves. If we continue to watch it all as if we're watching a TV reality show and our job is to RATE them instead of ROOTING for them, we'll always be part of the problem...
I hear you and I am a pretty informed (though not perfectly informed) citizen that agrees that there is a terrible trend about the reality TV aspect of politics (btw, I have never in my life seen a single episode of any reality TV show because it does not interest me at all). My concern is how Schumer did not even try to use leverage at all after talking tough about not having the votes and then doing a 180 (which, again, maybe was/is really the best option in the long run) without really effectively explaining. In my opinion, he is not a good leader, who can inspire people; I get that he is good at raising money, etc.
I wasn't trying to suggest that most people today watch reality TV shows, it was merely a metaphor for how people "consume politics". They tend to behave as a passive "public" that scrolls through "the news" the way you mindlessly scroll through social media, impulsively throwing around "likes" and "dislikes" and "angry" emotional reactions, and that's it.
What we vitally need is for people to THINK again. That starts with listening to what politicians say (rather than getting our news from those reporting on what they said). Unfortunately, with such a low level of journalism in the legacy media, politicians often have to use language that is so carefully crafted that they almost don't say anything anymore (you saw that quite often with Kamala Harris last summer). But in this particular case, Schumer was CRYSTAL CLEAR (if you haven't heard him yet, go to his ten-minute appearance at The View last Tuesday; it's on YouTube).
So with that, let's go to your argument: Schumer "did not even try to use leverage at all".
My question would be: WHAT leverage do you actually think he has, now that the GOP is installing fascism?
It's the "installing fascism" part that is always missing when people discuss Schumer's decision (and of course, all the arguments he himself brought up - and then we come up with weak excuses such as "he doesn't inspire me enough so I won't take the time to listen to him"... which is exactly what I mean by confounding the political well-being of the country with watching a TV show).
Let's say that Schumer told the GOP that without massive concessions, no Democrat in the Senate would vote for the CR bill. After all, it does cut Medicaid by $880 billion, which is just one of the many reasons why it's such a horrible bill. In a DEMOCRATIC regime (so not a fascist one), with well-functioning MSM, "we the people" would immediately blame the GOP for refusing to come up with a bipartisan bill and engage in real, fair negotiations with Democrats (especially knowing how extremely narrow their margin was, in November). The GOP would know this, would be afraid of losing the 2026 elections, and would cave in to public pressure and compromise with Democrats.
But you see, the LEVERAGE always comes from "we the people", via the media. Today, MSM practice a horrible form of "both-sides-ism" so you saw NO outrage AT ALL, when it became clear that this time, the GOP would refuse to compromise and come up with a bipartisan bill. On the contrary, the media seem to be entirely passive, EXPECTING the GOP to behave in a totalitarian way, so the moral outrage is totally absent. Result? There is no moral outrage among GOP voters at all (they too tended to be pro-democracy, and probably mostly still are, today), and then there is the Democratic base.
IF Democrats would organize mass protests in DC, THEN Schumer would again have some leverage. But Democrats are staying home - too desperate and stuck in emotional reactivity.
And even with protests, what Nov. 5 has proven is that the neofascist GOP propaganda machine is now so well-oiled that they can spin about everything in such a way that they look good and Democrats bad, so the only use of mass protests today is to send a strong signal to everyone assailed by the Trump regime (civil servants, law firms, journalists, political opponents, ...) to NOT give up the fight and to mobilize the base so that Democrats have a landslide victory in 2026.
But that's not happening either (for now).
And then there is THE most important fact, which is typical for fascism and the very opposite of what happens in any form of democratic governance (whether it's liberals or conservatives who govern): today's neofascist GOP absolutely WANTS a shutdown. In democratic circumstances, being responsible for a shutdown (because as ruling party you don't even include the opposition in negotiations) is very bad for your chances to win the next election. In a fascist environment, however, it's VERY VERY good. As already said, it would multiple the chainsaw approach to democratic institution inside the executive branch of government and install fascism much faster and in a much more irreversible way.
Not only was it crucial to avoid that from happening (first key reason to not block the CR bill), once the other party WANTS a shutdown, you basically lose ALL leverage you could possibly have. You NEED the governing party to want to avoid a shutdown BEFORe you have leverage.
So with that... if you believe Democrats actually had any leverage, my question to you would be: what leverage, concretely?
People are in the streets. I am not sure it’s being covered very well. Last night I attended an empty chair townhall and it will not be my last. The venue was packed and the speakers were all well-informed. (Also, I know that you were not suggesting watching reality TV, but I was just trying to make a point that I, personally, might not be understanding why so many people are not taking this seriously because I don’t really get the appeal of reality TV). Yes, Democrats are locked out of power, so you are right that there may not have been real leverage that they had, but could they at least have made speeches on the floor or something? I do think that inspiration and narrative building is important and Schumer looked weak because of the flipflop. I hate that perception is reality, but unfortunately, for many it is. I have come around to thinking that passing the CR is probably best in this situation, but there needs to be more boldness and less fear about telling people that this is a fascist takeover.
What makes you believe I believe the Democrats could have stopped them. What galls me is that Schumer and the rest of the so-called leadership were so passive that they were maneuvered into a position where they helped the Republicans.
That's what all the media are yelling indeed. It's also entirely false. Just ask yourself: what would have happened if they'd have gone for a shutdown. Any idea?
They didn’t have to “go for a shutdown.” If Schumer had waived the filibuster, he would have forced Republicans to pass their unilateral, nasty piece of work on their own, instead of having a “bipartisan” bill presented to Trump**.
And there is a big enough majority of Republicans in the Senate that it would have passed. The end result, whether Schumer stood strong or not, would be the same. The CR passes.
Not necessarily in normal circumstances, no, but these are extraordinary circumstances, in which, for the very first time, a major political party is installing fascism in the US and destroying all democratic institutions. So give the Senate the excuse to end the filibuster by ending it yourself, and you would have allowed them to legalize all the illegal stuff that Musk is doing.
Also, WHY would Schumer support a filibuster to make it easier for the GOP to pass bills in the first place... ?
1. Waiving the filibuster for the CR would compel the R’s to pass their nasty bill on their own. They would not have the cover they now have of saying (untruthfully) that the CR is a bipartisan piece of legislation.
2. The filibuster has warped into a terrible, undemocratic procedure that the Republicans party has abused for decades to impede good legislation. To me, it would be good to see Democrats dare the McConvilles of the world to do away with the filibuster completely. Would be horrible for the next two years, but if the Dems can’t win back the Senate, the country is doomed anyway.
I'm willing to concede that possibility. JVL wrote a really good piece on this a few days ago.
But here's what you need to confront: 215 Democrats in the House & 40 Democrats in the Senate...including some REALLY savvy operators like Nancy Pelosi (I still remember how well she handled Trump in 2017), AOC, Hakeem Jeffries, Raphel Warnock, Mark Kelly, Bernie Sanders, Ruben Gallegos, Elissa Slotkin, and a whole host of other pretty decent politicos...
What does Chuck Schumer know that they don't know? Did Schumer help Slotkin or Ossof in their next re-election? Did Schumer help set up state level Dems or Congressional Dems for a wave in 2026? Or help Dems in 2025 special elections?
Schumer doesn't have a history of being good at this...so, I'm willing to admit that we all don't know...his actions certainly stand opposed to what a lot of other far more intelligent, far more savvy, and far more practical Democrats suggested.
Maybe Schumer is suddenly playing 4D chess & we just don't know. Or maybe this is just par for the course. I guess time will tell.
I might add: Schumer himself was the one playing hardball and building up tension with his “they don’t have the votes” schpiel. He was the one gunning for a fight. He was the one who made a shutdown seem like a less bad option. And then he crumpled with absolutely no resistance. Didn’t even try to use the power of the filibuster to negotiate. Of course we all know neither republicans or Trump would honor the negotiations, but what a great talking point it would have been to say “here’s what we demanded to help our constituents but Trump and/or senate republicans refused to cooperate.”
Now we get to watch as Dems make fools of themselves as they fumble to explain boring procedural nuances to justify voting for the CR when they had no intention of voting for the final bill and will essentially be cut out of the equation completely. I’m sure the average voter will be dying to hear all about it.
Hard choice, yes! Right choice, I believe so as a government shut-down would hurt many who would not have their "back-pay" paid. Trump/Musk will do damage regardless of an open or shut government. History will prove his Hard choice the better of two evils. Four evils, if I include Trump and Muskrat.
Except that it handed Trump and Musk more power without the optics of a government shutdown at their feet. If Trump didn't want a shutdown, he wouldn't have been congratulating Schumer. The GOP wouldn't have been saying it is in the Dems hands now as to whether or not they want a shutdown. You are missing the bald-faced truth which is that the law do not matter to Trump. He would have done whatever he wanted anyways, he just also got a win. The GOP got a win. They get to say THEY made a deal. It is all optics right now and Schumer gave MAGA a nice big win.
You mean you want to believe Trump when he says something, rather than accepting that he lies all the time, and only to win elections?
And no, it's precisely now that optics don't matter at all anymore - precisely because the GOP managed to build a by now well-oiled fascist propaganda machine while the legacy media have become extremely weak.
All that matters, as Schumer correctly understood, is slowing down the destruction of democratic institutions, because our only change to defeat fascism, over time, is to be able to rebuild them fast enough, once Democrats take over again, BEFORE people lose their patience and begin voting for neofascists again (as is happening today in Poland).
So with all respect, but IMHO anyone who doesn't see that Schumer did the right thing doesn't understand just how grave the situation actually is today.
Do I understand you correctly: Its better to let Musk/Trump shut down everything by December than to let Musk Trump shut down everything in March?
You'll need to clarify that logic. I'm willing to keep an open mind, but slowing down things by 6-8 months until after this years elections isn't super convincing on its face.
Lol. You should read some books about war strategies :-).
Obviously, when you're in a war you HAVE to look at ALL the options on the table, and that always includes the future, including how and what to rebuild. Why would anyone go into a war blind-sighted... ??
This shows why Dems and others are not winning against fascism. GOP response "they are drunk on stolen power". Robers response "not an appropriate response". When will the non-Trump learn that they have to get mean and get down and dirty with them. One is playing checkers, the other dodgeball with hand grenades.
john roberts is not, under any circumstances, a democrat: his critical decisions, including vitiating the voting rights act, ignoring the problem of gerrymandering, and annointing trump with immunity, demonstrate that he is a hard-core republican.
he's just not a fascist per se.
now, i agree with your underlying point - the dems don't seem willing to act with the urgency of the moment - but citing john roberts isn't the way to make said point.
At least he came on line today to chastise the Felon-in-Chief for demanding that Judge Boasberg be "impeached", essentially for standing up for the law versus the lawless.
If he thought Trump were dangerous, he wouldn't have offered Trump blanket immunity for any and all actions as POTUS & most actions as a private citizen.
Theres also the issue of refusing to enforce a code of professional conduct on his fellow 'justices' despite knowing that they are 100% partisan lickspittles for whatever Trump puts on the SCOTUS docket.
Roberts does NOT believe Trump is dangerous. Its dangerous to think otherwise.
"Tom Homan, the White House “border czar,” said in a Fox News interview that the flights will continue, and any judge’s contrariwise order is inconsequential to him. “We are not stopping. I don’t care what the judges think,” he said. “I don’t care what the Left thinks. We’re coming.”
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt added in a statement that the court order has “no lawful basis.”"
This is the entire ballgame and unless something drastically changes, we have lost the rule of law for a generation. It's over. And half the country is ok with it. Things are going to get really ugly, either because we no longer have the rule of law or because of events that take place in order to restore it.
what a third-rate group of thugs work for trump, and i am totally in agreement with you: we are watching the shattering of the constitutional order and the end of anything approximating the rule of law right in front of us, and as i noted above, as a 72-year-old, i don't expect the damage to be undone in the remainder of my lifetime.
I'm not much younger than you, but I agree, this is a long-term disaster. As a country, our ability to determine facts and truth has completely collapsed. I don't know how we find our footing again in this increasingly fragmented information and disinformation environment.
Martin Niemöller: First they came for the Jews, but I did not say anything because I am not a Jew, then they came for the Socialists, but I did not say anything because I am not a Socialist, then they came for the Catholics, but I did not say anything because I am not a Catholic, then they came for me and there was no one left to say anything for me.
Jews are actually in the cross-hairs. Started with the idea that 'good' Jews support Trump and 'bad' Jews don't. Ben Shapiro is a willing collaborator in this. IIf all goes as planned, MAGA and the other authoritarians will really start pitting Jewish people against one another. And thus the age-old cycle repeats.
It appears Leavitt is playing the role of Goebbels. She (channeling Trump of course) is trying (and succeeding) to convince people that she knows more about the law that the duly appointed judges.
1. However, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) spent the day speculating about the CIA’s role in the JFK assassination.
THIS is the sad state of affairs in the USA. Democracy is on fire, and Rep. Mike Lee is deep diving into the release of JFK docs that nobody wants or asked for....
Since John Roberts made the unusual step of commenting about impeaching Judges, don't be shocked that he himself will be subjected to it by the MAGA right.
The aircraft probably were in international airspace by the time the court ruling came down. Most likely they launched from one of the airports close to the border like Harlingen, Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo, El Paso or San Diego. Literally they turned out of the pattern and they’re in Mexico. You think if they’d left a prisoner behind or the $1,000,000 in gold for Nayib Bukele as a “thank you gift” for taking them (why were they so worried about our gold stocks at Ft Knox?) they couldn’t have turned around? Uh huh.
I’m a federal worker that’s been dragged in to an office campus that’s not built for the full workforce. I thought I could do it but I just don’t know if I can do this anymore.
Judge Boasberg has a stellar resume. He needs to use a tool he has right now—contempt. If a lawyer in front of him defies him or refuses to answer a question, jail him until he does. Of course, the law enforcement folks would have to enforce the court’s contempt order. But since a conflict with the judiciary is inevitable with this rogue “President”, might as well bring it on now.
And I say that despite being shamefully glad a lot of violent gangsters (assuming they are) have been sent away. The problem is that over time, those sent away could grow to include people who criticize the fascists. Like me and nearly everyone close to me.
How can you in the SAME article claim (correctly) that the GOP is installing fascism in the US and continue to spread the LIE that Schumer would have made the wrong decision???
When will you guys finally wake up?
And waking up starts with trying to REFUTE Schumer's arguments. None of those yelling at him today ever even address his arguments. Pure rage is all that you have to offer... at a time when, more then EVER before, we need calm level-headedness and THINKING.
Until now, it seems as if only Schumer was able to do so. It turns out that old(er) age DOES have some advantages, after all. Who would have thought?
Schumer chose to capitulate instead of fight. That is why he made the wrong decision. Maybe he made the right technical decision of slowing down the closure of agencies - but how right? Slim margins here. The message was pretty clear to folks. Fight. Fight. Fight. He did not, ergo, wrong decision for the moment.
Well, that's what all the media are yelling. Why are you still believing them. Just think for yourself for a second and ask yourself two things: (1) what were Schumer's arguments? and (2) what are your counterarguments?
Anyone who allows himself to divert his anger against Trump and direct it against Schumer now tends to never ever have paused to ask himself these questions. Did you? If yes, what are your answers?
I don’t know what you’re trying to say. I was on the phone with my Senators telling them to shut it down. I read Schumer’s rationale. The right call was to fight.
I'm asking you: please summarize Schumer's arguments and tell us why you disagreed with them. Here you merely say you disagreed. Everyone is yelling that today. I'm looking for someone who can explain WHY you disagreed with his arguments. The scary thing? No one even CONSIDERED that question, until now. So one party installs fascism and the other party's voters are so emotionally shocked that they stop all thinking...
The argument is this (I think): There was exactly ONE chance for the Dems to negotiate any concessions in 2025. It was last week. Now that single opportunity is foreclosed.
What did Schumer get out of that one chance? A slight delay in the dismantling of federal institutions from this month until later this year. (Let me know if thats not a fair summary of his arguments).
Theres a 100% chance of Musk/Trump achieving the majority of their goals now.
Would a shutdown have benefitted the dems? yeah, more than likely...when federal employees in red states & purple states got furloughed? national Parks closed? SS payments delayed?
Dems need to run the table in 2026 in order for there to be real, meaningful elections in 2028. This makes the 2026 campaign harder.
Dem approval ratings are dropping faster than the value of a Trump Meme Coin right now. I'd HATE to be running as a D in 2026 and be associated with this clown car.
Feel free to let me know where I'm wrong: Would YOU want to ask Democrats for a donation to run for state legislature next year after this? I wouldn't. (And I've run for state legislature...)
This significantly hurts the abilities of Dems to continue to fight for the next 3 years of this administration. IMO.
With all respect, yes, I do believe that those arguments are wrong.
First of all, I don't see that as what Schumer said. And I also wouldn't see why there would be only ONE week to negotiate with the GOP (apart from the fact that he didn't gave that argument himself)? This CR is only until September, so it's a six month continuation of Biden-level funding of the government. Then the circus (initiated by the GOP under Obama) starts all over again. Which also means that Democrats can see whether it's possible to adopt a different strategy in September.
Here's what his real argument was, imho (see his interview on The View yesterday, where he summarized it PERFECTLY, and very clearly and easy to understand):
- the GOP has become a neofascist party, that wants to destroy all democratic institutions and replace them with fascist ones
- they had four years to ask their ideologues, who are passionate about the nitty-gritty of governing, to design a detailed roadmap: Project 2025 (and its explanation by the Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts in his latest book, "Dawn's Early Light" - that's me adding to what Schumer said)
- that roadmap is based on Peter Thiel (neofascist tech billionaire, bankrolls Vance's career as venture capitalist and then politician) concept of RAGE: Retire All Government Employees, in other words, fire them all asap, because they're all pro-democracy (since they swore an oath to the Constitution), and then replace them with pro-fascism civil servants
- what will the neofascist US institutions look like? Their purpose is to make the wealthiest neofascists wealthier and to privatize all public services, based on a typical fascist concept of human nature that divides humanity in a few superior individuals and inferior "basement dwellers" (as Trump calls his voters in private), so for them, social security for all means, as Musk said in a recent Joe Rogan interview, "weaponizing empathy", in other words, it's bad. Does that mean that many American will die much faster? Yes. For neofascists, that's the price to pay to have a "healthier" society
- what is the main roadblock that they encounter, so what is the only thing pro-democracy politicians and other groups can do to stop this from happening? The main one is for them to win the 2026 and 2028 elections, so Trump is doing everything possible to prevent that from happening (including going after ActBlue and other Democratic donor networks, and of course, destroying their reputation, going after their legal firms, etc.)
- second main roadblock: their entire roadmap is ILLEGAL and anti-constitutional, so the 80 lawsuits filed already (thanks to long preparation by Dem lawyers, lawsuits that Democrats are winning) seriously slow down the entire process
- what would a government shutdown do? EXACTLY what these neofascists want, namely make it LEGAL for them to destroy all agencies and defund all programs, so to install fascism much much faster
- why does speed matter? Because, as history has shown, the more democratic institutions are destroyed by the time pro-democracy politicians can take over, the longer it takes to rebuild them, and DURING the rebuilding process, almost no public services are available yet, so it's very easy for voters to get frustrated and angry AGAIN and then vote for fascists again.
That is why it was absolutely VITAL to NOT shut down the government, you see?
And yes, the media (including many independent ones) are doing a horrible job explaining why it was necessary - just like they did a horrible job clearly explaining that Trump would replace the US democracy with fascism. So we vitally need voters to inform themselves now, if not (and if people continue to blame DEMOCRATS for what's going on, which is THE most irrational, absurd and counterproductive thing to do) fascism will be here for DECADES...
It's not certain that Jeffries was blindsided. But if if he were, it doesn't matter. The CR bill is HORRIBLE, so it's important that as many Democrats as possible voted against it. What defines "possible" here? We only needed enough Democrats to vote FOR it to have it passed. That means: only one Democrat in the House, and only a handful in the Senate. Not more than that.
None, of course. You're still imagining that we're living in a democracy and that real negotiations in Congress are as possible as they are desirable.
This wasn't about Democrats versus Republicans in Congress. It was about the independence of Congress and the courts from the White House. That independence is largely preserved, thanks to Schumer. A shutdown would have entirely destroyed it and given Trump/Musk everything they needed to install fascism much much faster. And knowing how difficult it is to revert the process once it's done, this was the only wise thing to do.
And no, I don't think Schumer "blindsided his own". The CR is absolutely horrible, no one is denying that. So as many Dems as possible had to vote against it. "Possible" here is defined as: all the Democrats who can afford to vote against it without causing a government shutdown.
The public HAS to increase its political literacy, and urgently. We need to stop treating the government as a reality show and politicians as celebrities. The GOP is installing fascism. This is FOR REAL. So "the public", in other words "we the people" urgently need to get real too and start to inform ourselves and THINK. Without that, no democracy can ever be saved...
Thanks for your article. Like in Europe and Japan, in the 1930's very few public figures explicitly or openly denounced Fascism or Nazism as it distinctively happened. Aware that my opinions here and elsewhere are uninportant or unnoticeable, I will keep denouncing it even though I may become a target of Trump's raids to silence or expel naturalized legal inmigrants, like so many already are.
Thanks for replying. Nobody is asking you to move to other fascists’ territories. I am an independent voter and do not trust politicians. Best regards.
Thats a great ad campaign from Vote Vets. Exactly what the Democrats need to be doing. We should be HAMMERING the GOP on cuts to veterans services, cuts to Social Security customer service, National Parks not opening or being staffed this summer, etc etc.
Basically ANYTHING but fighting tooth and nail to save USAID. I think USAID does many great things and foreign aid is a crucial part of American soft power projection. But it does little to connect with the median voter in the heartland.
Focus on kitchen table issues and the tangible damage the Musk/Trump administration is doing to real actual everyday service delivery.
Use that image of Musk with the chainsaw
I'm not convinced that the median voter in the heartland is pro-kids dying in countries where USAID used to provide food and essential medical care.
I am not so convinced they are anti-enough kids dying in those places because they are far away and out of sight. It's not real.
esp since growing the food for USAID helps farmers, some of whom are going to be wiped out by the cancellation
They tell themselves, "Well, we can't save the whole world," and then shrug it off. It's the Titanic lifeboat mentality. Hit the hands of the people trying to get into your boat which might cause it to tip.
I also think most people are basically good and would be against that IF THEY WERE CONVINCED IT WAS TRUE. But the median R voter in America is informationally agnostic and. easily misled by more persuasive and motivated peers and family acquaintances. I'm sorry but you could never get that message through to them.
They may be ok with that kind of aid, but I don't think it has high salience.
I'm sure median voters say things like, "We have plenty of problems here. Why are we spending money in Africa?"
The median voter didn’t give a shit when kids were gunned down in Sandy Hook. I don’t think they’ll give a second thought to kids in another country.
This whole conversation is depressing.
Re: Schumer—an impossible choice, stop the government and face martial law or pass a CR … and wait for martial law.
Possibly true, but lying down rather than going down fighting is that for which he will be remembered ... if he is remembered at all.
Agreed. Reluctantly agreed.
Schumer didn't read the room. He was being told to fight, to make things difficult and he chicken out. The outcomes were shit either way, and he chose to cower than stand tall and be a fighter.
Agreed. Heartbreakingly agreed.
At least if Schumer stayed strong, it would have brought the issue to the American public. This wholesale takeover of the government could have been addressed and explained to the masses, while the MSM has been busy ignoring the issue and longterm repercussions of these policies; normalizing this spectacle and Trump’s unconstitutional actions.
Now we have no leverage, and Trump will continue to lay waste to the government with impunity. Congress just seeded all authority, including any possibility of reining in Trump and ludicrous Tariff agenda.
Bottom line: Democrats are now COMPLICIT, with 11 democratic senators and congressmen, making the CR a bi-partisan affair.
Personally, I think it was his WS and AIPAC buddies who convinced Schumer to lay down. The same people who couldn’t give a rats ass about our democracy; just tax cuts and deregulation. And in AIPAC’s case, 100% fealty to Israel; even with extremists in charge. IMHO…:)
AIPAC … and keeping an autocrat in power, lest Bibi be offended.
I think he did what he had to do, but I don't like his image. He looks ridiculous and weak and it rubs off on the whole party.
Fair enough, but the image is of the Weimar Republic; circa 1933. Schumer is Franz von Papen (Chancellor of Germany in 1932), to Biden’s Hindenburg (President of the Weimar Republic).
Both Hindenburg (feeble and weak) and Papen (in over his head), believed they could rein in Hitler, and bring him to heel. Instead, Hitler became Chancellor in 53 days, and the rest is history. Trump’s coup will be a close second. IMHO!…:)
The American voter, especially those not particularly attached to any sort of ideological or partisan mooring, is desperate for a politician with a single shit to give.
Not only did Schumer not have one single shit to give for people losing for leadership, he abandoned his own caucus.
When furloughed government employees think about how the Dems stood up to Trump & Musk, are they going to remember the 260 Dems who stood up for them? Or are they going to remember Chuck & the 10 who let Musk rampage his chainsaw across the government?
JVL wrote a great piece on the policy implications of Schemer's massive fold. But The politics of this are off the charts bad.
Schumer's mistake was he thought there would be something he could salvage that he could claim as the scrap of a win. There was nothing that qualified. The outcomes were all bad. regardless of what he did. However, he should not have given up the fight just because defeat was inevitable.
Another disadvantage—he still plays by the rules; in Trumplandia, there are no rules.
It’s true. He should have taken numerous shots at MAGA. But he’s just constitutionally incapable of bringing it in the way that’s needed, anyway. It’s an understatement to say he’s not media savvy. He really should step aside.
Yes, Schumer’s mistake. Should have stood up? Yes. Filibustered? I don’t know. But I’m also not sure those fired (rehired?) federal employees care to make Schumer as big a villain as the pundits do. 230 Dems may have voted their (employees’) way … but they didn’t raise their voices either.
i am 72: i do not expect the damage being done in the past 8 weeks alone to be undone in my lifetime, and possibly ever.
I'm 88 and expect to die totally disillusioned by the human race, and especially parts of the American populace
My dad died this past November and my mom, brother, and I have such mixed feelings, we miss him every day but are also so happy that he's not here to see this, because it would do him in. Almost every older person I know is saying things like "I'm glad I'm old and will die soon" because this is so heartbreaking. My mom was always sad that she's not a grandmother, and now she's talking about how grateful she is to not have grandchildren because she finds the world so distressing she would just be constantly sick for them.
I am only 63, but same. In fact, I am sure it will never really be undone.
56 and horrified by this turn of events. Will I eventually become my husband’s property?
I'm a childless cat lady but have had numerous conversations with my brother, who I trust, about how there may be a time I put everything in his name out of fear that women won't be allowed any assets or property or even income of their own......
That doesn’t make it right.
Oh there is nothing "right" about it, it's crazy and terrifying and disgustingly gross that we have to even have these conversations! Women in no other first world nation have to worry about this and here we are just going backwards in that hand basket to hell........
Can't like, Howard, but I would not take a bet that you are wrong.
As another codger, I tend to agree. (I'm more old fart than codger.) There have been times republics have sprung back. Greece had a civil war in the '40s Spain's installed Franco the decade before. Portugal was authoritarian. I'm not optimistic, there's still hope if we can figure out what buttons to push.
i believe that regulated market capitalism combined with democracy is the best system humanity has yet evolved, so i sincerely hope that my long-term pessimism is proven wrong....
I am only 41 and I don’t even expect it to be undone in my lifetime. I am weighing if it makes sense to just cut my losses and jump ship. I’d gladly stay and fight, but not by myself. Even the protests that have happened so far seem to be more about making the protestors feel better about themselves rather than pressuring the government. Protest movements that do not make demands, do not have a clear agenda, do not escalate or build upon previous actions, and do not focus on recruitment are simply for show.
I'd refer you to the tale of the scorpion and the frog - we knew Trump was poison long before the American people let him hitch a ride. So far, the only thing that's surprised me is: (1) Trump's attempt to seek retribution on a number of white shoe law firms solely for representing clients he dislikes; and (2) the fact so many voters pulled the lever for Trump because they *didn't* believe the statements he made on the campaign trail.
I know this comment will not be popular with a lot of the Bulwark community, but I think the 'I don't believe he will really do that' AND 'the price of eggs' reasons for voting for Trump were convenient excuses (that were reinforced by the media as rational, too) because they could not fathom the idea of a black woman as president.
Yup. RACISM AND MISOGYNY.
I agree with you. They seem comfortable with accepting the price of eggs now, and even seem happy to accept a recession as a temporary inconvenience.
Ogles thinks that Judge Boasberg needs to recuse himself from hearing cases based on the Alien Enemies Act because his wife gave $11k to Democratic candidates? How does he feel about Justice Thomas not recusing himself from Harlan Crow's cases?
That's different though... because... we like him.
or for that matter Musk recusing himself out of our government if he wants to retain his ever-growing list of government contracts.
It looks like the GOP has gone full fascist now, something that seemed impossible 10 years ago. Also, Schumer will never, ever, ever live this down and should probably just resign at this point. (Good riddance)
HORRIBLY false perspective. Yes, the GOP is neofascist. Biden, Harris and Walz already told us so. And it's BECAUSE they are fascists that Schumer absolutely made the right decision. This CR vote was not a normal policy vote. Obviously, the bill is horrible - as Schumer himself explained. But in this case, contrary to all pro-democracy US presidents (Democratic and Republicans), Trump and Musk WANTED a government shutdown. Because that's the only thing that would legalize what they're doing to America's democratic institutions. And history has proven that it takes decades to rebuild them.
Schumer decided to NOT cave and stand up against Trump, by passing the CR bill, which essentially makes it illegal for Musk and Trump to destroy the government. That was the ONLY wise decision to make.
OOOOOOO—Makes it illegal. That’ll stop ‘em.
What makes you believe that it is possible to stop them? "We the people" took away all political power from Democrats, on all political levels. That basically means that NO ONE can STOP them. All that we can do is slow down the destruction, so that when Democrats can take over, the rebuilding of democratic institutions hopefully can take place fast enough - which means: hopefully people will understand that during the restoration, no public services will be available yet, so they'll have to continue to vote for Democrats until it's done and we can start focusing on policy again.
That, in and of itself, is already taking a huge risk. Deliberately speeding up this destruction, as the shutdown would have done, would have made its restoration in the future virtually impossible. And that is the ONLY thing that still matters today.
Unfortunately, history is replete with authoritarian take-overs that succeeded despite opposition. But each time we don't fight, it makes it easier for them and creates a propaganda vaccuum that Trump/Musk are happy to fill.
With all respect, you're not getting it. Fighting back IS what Schumer did. A shutdown would have done 100% what Musk and Trump wanted, namely allowing them to legally destroy all democratic institutions, and much faster than what is the case today and will be the case tomorrow.
For argument's sake, I'm willing to stipulate that Schumer's vote was the least bad of a "Hobson's Choice". But it was too polite. Make noise and attack boldly and impolitely even with a losing hand. Stunts are ok and even necessary. Trump did a gazillion stunts and it only helped him. Schumer's job includes doing any and everything to get a strong message out. He does not seem to understand that. It's not just about legislating; it's about constant messaging attacks against Trump/Musk etc, using as big a megaphone as possible. There is no real sense from him that this situation is a genuine 5-alarm fire, and that we have to throw everything at it. R's are flooding the zone, we are not providing any counterfire of even comparable force/passion/defiant spirit.
It's "we the people's" job to "make noise". It's a lawmaker's job to focus on lawmaking - and in this case, to slow down the installation of fascism, which is the only legal power "we the people" gave Schumer in the first place.
I couldn't disagree more with the entire "messaging" framework that is so often applied to Democrats. The media (even most online media) no longer do their job at all, and it's THEIR job to make sure that everyone knows who does what why in DC.
The arrival of fascism in the US made people falsely imagine that somehow, it would be possible, as pro-democracy politicians, to set up a propaganda machine as powerful as what fascist do. It's impossible. That propaganda machine is so powerful precisely because fascist politicians don't govern, so they don't need to focus 24/7 on their job, and because they vitally need lies and stirring up anger, which is VERY easy to do.
What Democrats need is a thriving media landscape that explains 24/7 what the complexity of the issues at hand is, what options are on the table, what the history of these issues is, etc. No politician can ever pack this kind of complexity into pleasing soundbites. So we HAVE to get off our social media addiction and do the media's work ourselves, I'm afraid. Because there is no other option available today.
Conclusion: whenever a fascist party gets democratically elected, the main cause is the extremely low political literacy of vast chunks of the people (not just of those voting against fascists but the people in general). Now, all the people want is sentiment and outrage, no rational thinking or even just calmly explaining things at all anymore. THAT is when the problem starts. And we'll only get our democracy back the day a substantial number of citizens accepts that THIS is how democracy works and start doing their homework. As history has shown, over and over again...
There is a whole generation that only know Trump and Biden as presidents. How can they go back to something they have no memory of? They have to be reached in the media that they actually consume. I wish it weren't true, but we are in a life-or-death battle for attention.
You could be correct here, but if that is the case, Schumer did not explain it forcefully enough. He said the words, yes, but not in a way that was even really believable.
A democracy is only a government FOR the people if it's a democracy BY the people. We urgently need to treat real, sincere, hard-working politicians as normal people, and then do OUR job as citizens, which is to inform ourselves. If we continue to watch it all as if we're watching a TV reality show and our job is to RATE them instead of ROOTING for them, we'll always be part of the problem...
I hear you and I am a pretty informed (though not perfectly informed) citizen that agrees that there is a terrible trend about the reality TV aspect of politics (btw, I have never in my life seen a single episode of any reality TV show because it does not interest me at all). My concern is how Schumer did not even try to use leverage at all after talking tough about not having the votes and then doing a 180 (which, again, maybe was/is really the best option in the long run) without really effectively explaining. In my opinion, he is not a good leader, who can inspire people; I get that he is good at raising money, etc.
I wasn't trying to suggest that most people today watch reality TV shows, it was merely a metaphor for how people "consume politics". They tend to behave as a passive "public" that scrolls through "the news" the way you mindlessly scroll through social media, impulsively throwing around "likes" and "dislikes" and "angry" emotional reactions, and that's it.
What we vitally need is for people to THINK again. That starts with listening to what politicians say (rather than getting our news from those reporting on what they said). Unfortunately, with such a low level of journalism in the legacy media, politicians often have to use language that is so carefully crafted that they almost don't say anything anymore (you saw that quite often with Kamala Harris last summer). But in this particular case, Schumer was CRYSTAL CLEAR (if you haven't heard him yet, go to his ten-minute appearance at The View last Tuesday; it's on YouTube).
So with that, let's go to your argument: Schumer "did not even try to use leverage at all".
My question would be: WHAT leverage do you actually think he has, now that the GOP is installing fascism?
It's the "installing fascism" part that is always missing when people discuss Schumer's decision (and of course, all the arguments he himself brought up - and then we come up with weak excuses such as "he doesn't inspire me enough so I won't take the time to listen to him"... which is exactly what I mean by confounding the political well-being of the country with watching a TV show).
Let's say that Schumer told the GOP that without massive concessions, no Democrat in the Senate would vote for the CR bill. After all, it does cut Medicaid by $880 billion, which is just one of the many reasons why it's such a horrible bill. In a DEMOCRATIC regime (so not a fascist one), with well-functioning MSM, "we the people" would immediately blame the GOP for refusing to come up with a bipartisan bill and engage in real, fair negotiations with Democrats (especially knowing how extremely narrow their margin was, in November). The GOP would know this, would be afraid of losing the 2026 elections, and would cave in to public pressure and compromise with Democrats.
But you see, the LEVERAGE always comes from "we the people", via the media. Today, MSM practice a horrible form of "both-sides-ism" so you saw NO outrage AT ALL, when it became clear that this time, the GOP would refuse to compromise and come up with a bipartisan bill. On the contrary, the media seem to be entirely passive, EXPECTING the GOP to behave in a totalitarian way, so the moral outrage is totally absent. Result? There is no moral outrage among GOP voters at all (they too tended to be pro-democracy, and probably mostly still are, today), and then there is the Democratic base.
IF Democrats would organize mass protests in DC, THEN Schumer would again have some leverage. But Democrats are staying home - too desperate and stuck in emotional reactivity.
And even with protests, what Nov. 5 has proven is that the neofascist GOP propaganda machine is now so well-oiled that they can spin about everything in such a way that they look good and Democrats bad, so the only use of mass protests today is to send a strong signal to everyone assailed by the Trump regime (civil servants, law firms, journalists, political opponents, ...) to NOT give up the fight and to mobilize the base so that Democrats have a landslide victory in 2026.
But that's not happening either (for now).
And then there is THE most important fact, which is typical for fascism and the very opposite of what happens in any form of democratic governance (whether it's liberals or conservatives who govern): today's neofascist GOP absolutely WANTS a shutdown. In democratic circumstances, being responsible for a shutdown (because as ruling party you don't even include the opposition in negotiations) is very bad for your chances to win the next election. In a fascist environment, however, it's VERY VERY good. As already said, it would multiple the chainsaw approach to democratic institution inside the executive branch of government and install fascism much faster and in a much more irreversible way.
Not only was it crucial to avoid that from happening (first key reason to not block the CR bill), once the other party WANTS a shutdown, you basically lose ALL leverage you could possibly have. You NEED the governing party to want to avoid a shutdown BEFORe you have leverage.
So with that... if you believe Democrats actually had any leverage, my question to you would be: what leverage, concretely?
People are in the streets. I am not sure it’s being covered very well. Last night I attended an empty chair townhall and it will not be my last. The venue was packed and the speakers were all well-informed. (Also, I know that you were not suggesting watching reality TV, but I was just trying to make a point that I, personally, might not be understanding why so many people are not taking this seriously because I don’t really get the appeal of reality TV). Yes, Democrats are locked out of power, so you are right that there may not have been real leverage that they had, but could they at least have made speeches on the floor or something? I do think that inspiration and narrative building is important and Schumer looked weak because of the flipflop. I hate that perception is reality, but unfortunately, for many it is. I have come around to thinking that passing the CR is probably best in this situation, but there needs to be more boldness and less fear about telling people that this is a fascist takeover.
What makes you believe I believe the Democrats could have stopped them. What galls me is that Schumer and the rest of the so-called leadership were so passive that they were maneuvered into a position where they helped the Republicans.
That's what all the media are yelling indeed. It's also entirely false. Just ask yourself: what would have happened if they'd have gone for a shutdown. Any idea?
They didn’t have to “go for a shutdown.” If Schumer had waived the filibuster, he would have forced Republicans to pass their unilateral, nasty piece of work on their own, instead of having a “bipartisan” bill presented to Trump**.
And there is a big enough majority of Republicans in the Senate that it would have passed. The end result, whether Schumer stood strong or not, would be the same. The CR passes.
Waiving the filibuster would have opened the door to losing ALL power the opposition will ever have, in the future. So it wasn't an option...
Waiving the filibuster rule for one vote on one bill does not waive the filibuster for all votes on all bills.
Not necessarily in normal circumstances, no, but these are extraordinary circumstances, in which, for the very first time, a major political party is installing fascism in the US and destroying all democratic institutions. So give the Senate the excuse to end the filibuster by ending it yourself, and you would have allowed them to legalize all the illegal stuff that Musk is doing.
Also, WHY would Schumer support a filibuster to make it easier for the GOP to pass bills in the first place... ?
1. Waiving the filibuster for the CR would compel the R’s to pass their nasty bill on their own. They would not have the cover they now have of saying (untruthfully) that the CR is a bipartisan piece of legislation.
2. The filibuster has warped into a terrible, undemocratic procedure that the Republicans party has abused for decades to impede good legislation. To me, it would be good to see Democrats dare the McConvilles of the world to do away with the filibuster completely. Would be horrible for the next two years, but if the Dems can’t win back the Senate, the country is doomed anyway.
I'm willing to concede that possibility. JVL wrote a really good piece on this a few days ago.
But here's what you need to confront: 215 Democrats in the House & 40 Democrats in the Senate...including some REALLY savvy operators like Nancy Pelosi (I still remember how well she handled Trump in 2017), AOC, Hakeem Jeffries, Raphel Warnock, Mark Kelly, Bernie Sanders, Ruben Gallegos, Elissa Slotkin, and a whole host of other pretty decent politicos...
What does Chuck Schumer know that they don't know? Did Schumer help Slotkin or Ossof in their next re-election? Did Schumer help set up state level Dems or Congressional Dems for a wave in 2026? Or help Dems in 2025 special elections?
Schumer doesn't have a history of being good at this...so, I'm willing to admit that we all don't know...his actions certainly stand opposed to what a lot of other far more intelligent, far more savvy, and far more practical Democrats suggested.
Maybe Schumer is suddenly playing 4D chess & we just don't know. Or maybe this is just par for the course. I guess time will tell.
I might add: Schumer himself was the one playing hardball and building up tension with his “they don’t have the votes” schpiel. He was the one gunning for a fight. He was the one who made a shutdown seem like a less bad option. And then he crumpled with absolutely no resistance. Didn’t even try to use the power of the filibuster to negotiate. Of course we all know neither republicans or Trump would honor the negotiations, but what a great talking point it would have been to say “here’s what we demanded to help our constituents but Trump and/or senate republicans refused to cooperate.”
Now we get to watch as Dems make fools of themselves as they fumble to explain boring procedural nuances to justify voting for the CR when they had no intention of voting for the final bill and will essentially be cut out of the equation completely. I’m sure the average voter will be dying to hear all about it.
Hard choice, yes! Right choice, I believe so as a government shut-down would hurt many who would not have their "back-pay" paid. Trump/Musk will do damage regardless of an open or shut government. History will prove his Hard choice the better of two evils. Four evils, if I include Trump and Muskrat.
Except that it handed Trump and Musk more power without the optics of a government shutdown at their feet. If Trump didn't want a shutdown, he wouldn't have been congratulating Schumer. The GOP wouldn't have been saying it is in the Dems hands now as to whether or not they want a shutdown. You are missing the bald-faced truth which is that the law do not matter to Trump. He would have done whatever he wanted anyways, he just also got a win. The GOP got a win. They get to say THEY made a deal. It is all optics right now and Schumer gave MAGA a nice big win.
You mean you want to believe Trump when he says something, rather than accepting that he lies all the time, and only to win elections?
And no, it's precisely now that optics don't matter at all anymore - precisely because the GOP managed to build a by now well-oiled fascist propaganda machine while the legacy media have become extremely weak.
All that matters, as Schumer correctly understood, is slowing down the destruction of democratic institutions, because our only change to defeat fascism, over time, is to be able to rebuild them fast enough, once Democrats take over again, BEFORE people lose their patience and begin voting for neofascists again (as is happening today in Poland).
So with all respect, but IMHO anyone who doesn't see that Schumer did the right thing doesn't understand just how grave the situation actually is today.
Do I understand you correctly: Its better to let Musk/Trump shut down everything by December than to let Musk Trump shut down everything in March?
You'll need to clarify that logic. I'm willing to keep an open mind, but slowing down things by 6-8 months until after this years elections isn't super convincing on its face.
There is no rebuilding when you’re in the middle of a war. You fight when you’re in a war.
Lol. You should read some books about war strategies :-).
Obviously, when you're in a war you HAVE to look at ALL the options on the table, and that always includes the future, including how and what to rebuild. Why would anyone go into a war blind-sighted... ??
It was a fight worth having.
That actually seemed highly possible to me as much as 20 years ago.
This shows why Dems and others are not winning against fascism. GOP response "they are drunk on stolen power". Robers response "not an appropriate response". When will the non-Trump learn that they have to get mean and get down and dirty with them. One is playing checkers, the other dodgeball with hand grenades.
john roberts is not, under any circumstances, a democrat: his critical decisions, including vitiating the voting rights act, ignoring the problem of gerrymandering, and annointing trump with immunity, demonstrate that he is a hard-core republican.
he's just not a fascist per se.
now, i agree with your underlying point - the dems don't seem willing to act with the urgency of the moment - but citing john roberts isn't the way to make said point.
Roberts is corporate friendly, Federalist Society justice. He might, however, still have some sense that Trump is genuinely dangerous.
At least he came on line today to chastise the Felon-in-Chief for demanding that Judge Boasberg be "impeached", essentially for standing up for the law versus the lawless.
Only because he is protecting his own turf... or at least the wasteland he has helped make it.
If he thought Trump were dangerous, he wouldn't have offered Trump blanket immunity for any and all actions as POTUS & most actions as a private citizen.
Theres also the issue of refusing to enforce a code of professional conduct on his fellow 'justices' despite knowing that they are 100% partisan lickspittles for whatever Trump puts on the SCOTUS docket.
Roberts does NOT believe Trump is dangerous. Its dangerous to think otherwise.
This is exactly why people are so angry with Schumer - FIGHT - darn it - FIGHT!!!!
Chuck Schumer canceling his book tour is the equivalent of Republicans wanting to avoid town halls because they don't provide a very good look.
"Tom Homan, the White House “border czar,” said in a Fox News interview that the flights will continue, and any judge’s contrariwise order is inconsequential to him. “We are not stopping. I don’t care what the judges think,” he said. “I don’t care what the Left thinks. We’re coming.”
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt added in a statement that the court order has “no lawful basis.”"
This is the entire ballgame and unless something drastically changes, we have lost the rule of law for a generation. It's over. And half the country is ok with it. Things are going to get really ugly, either because we no longer have the rule of law or because of events that take place in order to restore it.
what a third-rate group of thugs work for trump, and i am totally in agreement with you: we are watching the shattering of the constitutional order and the end of anything approximating the rule of law right in front of us, and as i noted above, as a 72-year-old, i don't expect the damage to be undone in the remainder of my lifetime.
I'm not much younger than you, but I agree, this is a long-term disaster. As a country, our ability to determine facts and truth has completely collapsed. I don't know how we find our footing again in this increasingly fragmented information and disinformation environment.
Martin Niemöller: First they came for the Jews, but I did not say anything because I am not a Jew, then they came for the Socialists, but I did not say anything because I am not a Socialist, then they came for the Catholics, but I did not say anything because I am not a Catholic, then they came for me and there was no one left to say anything for me.
Unfortunately, this is actually timely. It's been quoted a lot in the past, but has real application now.
I have been quoting it for a while because it clearly was coming. Thanks for concuring that is "unfortunate" but "timely".🍻
Jews are actually in the cross-hairs. Started with the idea that 'good' Jews support Trump and 'bad' Jews don't. Ben Shapiro is a willing collaborator in this. IIf all goes as planned, MAGA and the other authoritarians will really start pitting Jewish people against one another. And thus the age-old cycle repeats.
Tom Homan is the Trump administration’s pet chihuahua.
It appears Leavitt is playing the role of Goebbels. She (channeling Trump of course) is trying (and succeeding) to convince people that she knows more about the law that the duly appointed judges.
My fave is this footnote:
1. However, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) spent the day speculating about the CIA’s role in the JFK assassination.
THIS is the sad state of affairs in the USA. Democracy is on fire, and Rep. Mike Lee is deep diving into the release of JFK docs that nobody wants or asked for....
Mike Lee has turned out to be one of the slimiest politicians in our nation. The Mormons must be so proud of him.
And yet...he got elected. Ted Cruz is also despised in Texas for the most part...and yet...How do these awful people get elected?
A lot of them never face any primary challengers. When you live in a reliably blue or red state, you end up being grandfathered in.
If people did that we would not have Trump but I 100% agree with you.
Democrats could take a page from the "elbow throwing" tactics of VoteVets.
Since John Roberts made the unusual step of commenting about impeaching Judges, don't be shocked that he himself will be subjected to it by the MAGA right.
The aircraft probably were in international airspace by the time the court ruling came down. Most likely they launched from one of the airports close to the border like Harlingen, Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo, El Paso or San Diego. Literally they turned out of the pattern and they’re in Mexico. You think if they’d left a prisoner behind or the $1,000,000 in gold for Nayib Bukele as a “thank you gift” for taking them (why were they so worried about our gold stocks at Ft Knox?) they couldn’t have turned around? Uh huh.
The airplanes may have been in international airspace … but DoJ officials were not = blatant disregard for a proper legal order.
I’m a federal worker that’s been dragged in to an office campus that’s not built for the full workforce. I thought I could do it but I just don’t know if I can do this anymore.
I'm curious, are folks looking at going elsewhere? Like moving to state or even local government, in order to stay in the business of public service?
Judge Boasberg has a stellar resume. He needs to use a tool he has right now—contempt. If a lawyer in front of him defies him or refuses to answer a question, jail him until he does. Of course, the law enforcement folks would have to enforce the court’s contempt order. But since a conflict with the judiciary is inevitable with this rogue “President”, might as well bring it on now.
And I say that despite being shamefully glad a lot of violent gangsters (assuming they are) have been sent away. The problem is that over time, those sent away could grow to include people who criticize the fascists. Like me and nearly everyone close to me.
Agree. No benefit in delaying the inevitable.
How can you in the SAME article claim (correctly) that the GOP is installing fascism in the US and continue to spread the LIE that Schumer would have made the wrong decision???
When will you guys finally wake up?
And waking up starts with trying to REFUTE Schumer's arguments. None of those yelling at him today ever even address his arguments. Pure rage is all that you have to offer... at a time when, more then EVER before, we need calm level-headedness and THINKING.
Until now, it seems as if only Schumer was able to do so. It turns out that old(er) age DOES have some advantages, after all. Who would have thought?
Schumer chose to capitulate instead of fight. That is why he made the wrong decision. Maybe he made the right technical decision of slowing down the closure of agencies - but how right? Slim margins here. The message was pretty clear to folks. Fight. Fight. Fight. He did not, ergo, wrong decision for the moment.
Well, that's what all the media are yelling. Why are you still believing them. Just think for yourself for a second and ask yourself two things: (1) what were Schumer's arguments? and (2) what are your counterarguments?
Anyone who allows himself to divert his anger against Trump and direct it against Schumer now tends to never ever have paused to ask himself these questions. Did you? If yes, what are your answers?
I don’t know what you’re trying to say. I was on the phone with my Senators telling them to shut it down. I read Schumer’s rationale. The right call was to fight.
I'm asking you: please summarize Schumer's arguments and tell us why you disagreed with them. Here you merely say you disagreed. Everyone is yelling that today. I'm looking for someone who can explain WHY you disagreed with his arguments. The scary thing? No one even CONSIDERED that question, until now. So one party installs fascism and the other party's voters are so emotionally shocked that they stop all thinking...
The argument is this (I think): There was exactly ONE chance for the Dems to negotiate any concessions in 2025. It was last week. Now that single opportunity is foreclosed.
What did Schumer get out of that one chance? A slight delay in the dismantling of federal institutions from this month until later this year. (Let me know if thats not a fair summary of his arguments).
Theres a 100% chance of Musk/Trump achieving the majority of their goals now.
Would a shutdown have benefitted the dems? yeah, more than likely...when federal employees in red states & purple states got furloughed? national Parks closed? SS payments delayed?
Dems need to run the table in 2026 in order for there to be real, meaningful elections in 2028. This makes the 2026 campaign harder.
Dem approval ratings are dropping faster than the value of a Trump Meme Coin right now. I'd HATE to be running as a D in 2026 and be associated with this clown car.
Feel free to let me know where I'm wrong: Would YOU want to ask Democrats for a donation to run for state legislature next year after this? I wouldn't. (And I've run for state legislature...)
This significantly hurts the abilities of Dems to continue to fight for the next 3 years of this administration. IMO.
With all respect, yes, I do believe that those arguments are wrong.
First of all, I don't see that as what Schumer said. And I also wouldn't see why there would be only ONE week to negotiate with the GOP (apart from the fact that he didn't gave that argument himself)? This CR is only until September, so it's a six month continuation of Biden-level funding of the government. Then the circus (initiated by the GOP under Obama) starts all over again. Which also means that Democrats can see whether it's possible to adopt a different strategy in September.
Here's what his real argument was, imho (see his interview on The View yesterday, where he summarized it PERFECTLY, and very clearly and easy to understand):
- the GOP has become a neofascist party, that wants to destroy all democratic institutions and replace them with fascist ones
- they had four years to ask their ideologues, who are passionate about the nitty-gritty of governing, to design a detailed roadmap: Project 2025 (and its explanation by the Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts in his latest book, "Dawn's Early Light" - that's me adding to what Schumer said)
- that roadmap is based on Peter Thiel (neofascist tech billionaire, bankrolls Vance's career as venture capitalist and then politician) concept of RAGE: Retire All Government Employees, in other words, fire them all asap, because they're all pro-democracy (since they swore an oath to the Constitution), and then replace them with pro-fascism civil servants
- what will the neofascist US institutions look like? Their purpose is to make the wealthiest neofascists wealthier and to privatize all public services, based on a typical fascist concept of human nature that divides humanity in a few superior individuals and inferior "basement dwellers" (as Trump calls his voters in private), so for them, social security for all means, as Musk said in a recent Joe Rogan interview, "weaponizing empathy", in other words, it's bad. Does that mean that many American will die much faster? Yes. For neofascists, that's the price to pay to have a "healthier" society
- what is the main roadblock that they encounter, so what is the only thing pro-democracy politicians and other groups can do to stop this from happening? The main one is for them to win the 2026 and 2028 elections, so Trump is doing everything possible to prevent that from happening (including going after ActBlue and other Democratic donor networks, and of course, destroying their reputation, going after their legal firms, etc.)
- second main roadblock: their entire roadmap is ILLEGAL and anti-constitutional, so the 80 lawsuits filed already (thanks to long preparation by Dem lawyers, lawsuits that Democrats are winning) seriously slow down the entire process
- what would a government shutdown do? EXACTLY what these neofascists want, namely make it LEGAL for them to destroy all agencies and defund all programs, so to install fascism much much faster
- why does speed matter? Because, as history has shown, the more democratic institutions are destroyed by the time pro-democracy politicians can take over, the longer it takes to rebuild them, and DURING the rebuilding process, almost no public services are available yet, so it's very easy for voters to get frustrated and angry AGAIN and then vote for fascists again.
That is why it was absolutely VITAL to NOT shut down the government, you see?
And yes, the media (including many independent ones) are doing a horrible job explaining why it was necessary - just like they did a horrible job clearly explaining that Trump would replace the US democracy with fascism. So we vitally need voters to inform themselves now, if not (and if people continue to blame DEMOCRATS for what's going on, which is THE most irrational, absurd and counterproductive thing to do) fascism will be here for DECADES...
If that was Schumer's reason, why did he blindside the house (especially Jeffries) on this issue. That is a big problem for a Leader.
It's not certain that Jeffries was blindsided. But if if he were, it doesn't matter. The CR bill is HORRIBLE, so it's important that as many Democrats as possible voted against it. What defines "possible" here? We only needed enough Democrats to vote FOR it to have it passed. That means: only one Democrat in the House, and only a handful in the Senate. Not more than that.
What did concession did Schumer negotiate with the R's?
None, of course. You're still imagining that we're living in a democracy and that real negotiations in Congress are as possible as they are desirable.
This wasn't about Democrats versus Republicans in Congress. It was about the independence of Congress and the courts from the White House. That independence is largely preserved, thanks to Schumer. A shutdown would have entirely destroyed it and given Trump/Musk everything they needed to install fascism much much faster. And knowing how difficult it is to revert the process once it's done, this was the only wise thing to do.
You seem sure your course is correct. I've read Twentieth Century history, as have many here.
I disagree. We need the center to see more of what's happening. This makes it seem normal.
"You're still imagining..." You don't know what I imagine.
Perhaps, so in that case, what are the arguments refuting Schumer's arguments? Do you have any?
There are sound reasons for the CR. Schumer has apparently blindsided his own.
There is also reason to believe confronting the R's in a way the public can see is a better course.
So that's a no? You cannot come up with any?
And no, I don't think Schumer "blindsided his own". The CR is absolutely horrible, no one is denying that. So as many Dems as possible had to vote against it. "Possible" here is defined as: all the Democrats who can afford to vote against it without causing a government shutdown.
The public HAS to increase its political literacy, and urgently. We need to stop treating the government as a reality show and politicians as celebrities. The GOP is installing fascism. This is FOR REAL. So "the public", in other words "we the people" urgently need to get real too and start to inform ourselves and THINK. Without that, no democracy can ever be saved...
Thanks for your article. Like in Europe and Japan, in the 1930's very few public figures explicitly or openly denounced Fascism or Nazism as it distinctively happened. Aware that my opinions here and elsewhere are uninportant or unnoticeable, I will keep denouncing it even though I may become a target of Trump's raids to silence or expel naturalized legal inmigrants, like so many already are.
i have no intention of being scared, but that doesn't mean i have any interest in spending time in the super-red/fascist states.
Thanks for replying. Nobody is asking you to move to other fascists’ territories. I am an independent voter and do not trust politicians. Best regards.