Here's how we know the DSAers and Bernie Bros leading the attacks on Schumer over the shutdown deal are actually using it as pretext for an internal hostile takeover attempt: not only are they attacking Schumer even though he voted against the deal, they're rabidly attacking Hakeem Jeffries, who is whipping his caucus against the deal.
The deal, by the way, is a lot better than the lefty coup plotters (and the covert MAGA bot accounts amplifying their attacks) make it out to be
What deal? It was a capitulation... a cave. Senate Democrats traded away their one point of leverage for the promise of a vote on ACA, aka they got nothing.
Wrong, Michael. It was actually a win that the Bernie Bro wreckers are trying to turn into a loss to serve their goal of hijacking the party they hate.
If your DSA and Bernie Bro friends really were upset about the shutdown deal, why are they attacking Schumer AND JEFFRIES, who oppose the deal? It's a hostile takeover attempt as they've been trying since 2015
(Like) -- After the rush of resounding victories on Tuesday, the decisions made late Sunday opened up a vulnerability. One that the enemies of Democrats are trying to exploit.
I don't see anything in the linked article that supports your accusation of DSAers and Bernie Bros leading attacks on Schumer. Personally, I would say we don't know Schumer's true feelings about the deal but if he was truly against it but couldn't keep 8 senators from voting for it then it seems he has lost control of the caucus at minimum. I would also note that with 8 voting for it, there was cover for Schumer if he was for it but voted against it to keep from angering the rest of the caucus and most of the base.
The article seems to put out the idea that some Republican senators might vote to retain the ACA subsidies. If that proves to be the case, then "the deal" will have more merit. I don't hold out much hope for that but it might happen.
One thing is for certain, the fight I want for the next CR/shutdown battle at the end of January is full throated we worn't fund the Trump regime's effort to destroy the rule of law, our democratic republic form of government. We have to make it bigger than a one point policy battle.
First of all, I agree 100% with your last paragraph and that J30 is a key milestone to aim for.
Secondly, Schumer is compromised, he has lost the confidence of the American people. He is the face of the old school generation and it's time for a new face to represent " the big, broad tent" of pro-democracy.
Indivisible is calling for new leadership that will stand up to the fascist autocrats, i.e. someone to meet the moment we are in.They are going after incumbants in the primary season. People power.
Thinking that way doesn't make me a radical leftist, Nana, just an informed pro-democracy activist like you with a different opinion from yours.
While it doesn’t help to dwell on it, it is exceedingly dangerous to misrepresent or delude ourselves about what happened. This was an epic collapse of an entire political party orchestrated by 7 clueless Senators—a political miscalculation the likes of which we may never see again in our lifetimes. Truly. And the more we learn, it just gets worse. We are squarely in the realm of unfathomable at this point.
We have to deal with it. Move forward. Try somehow to be positive, and rebuild support with those who are now disillusioned with Democrats. We have lot of work to do.
And again, the worst thing we can do now is to pretend and act like this deal was somehow OK or something less than terrible. That’s a cult no one wants to join.
Thanks, Simon! Happy Veterans Day to all the Hopium veterans.
This morning, Trump is rage posting about Obama -- another clear sign of Alzheimer's. Obama gave Trump the worst narcissistic injury of Trump's life and Trump's addled brain keeps taking Trump back to those painful moments at the press dinner. He's so clearly unhinged.
I'm writing postcards for Aftyn Behn this morning and baking cookies to send a care package to my grandson. We're in a marathon, not a sprint.
Simon, Your Hopium is contagious. One thing, imo, you fail to note - in comprehensively cataloging the electoral (polling) weaknesses of the GOP and the absolute disgrace of the Red Wave polling outfits - is the polling weakness of the Congressional Dems. Their approval rating is in the gutter just a few points ahead of the GOP and behind Trump. Stunts like the other night don’t help and only increase cynicism.
Steve, we've addressed this here and what you write here is not correct. In the polls that matter for both the 2025 and 2026 elections - Party ID, generic ballot, who is more trusted on the economy - the Dems now hold sturdy leads. This talking point about the weakness of the Democratic Party brand absent this other context is in essence misinformation. For we just won a blow out election; have been overperforming all across the country in election after election; and yes while what has happened is not good for our family and our enthusiasm we don't yet know how this will all play out; and as I've been saying for many years the most powerful force in our politics today is fear and opposition to MAGA. It has proven to be more powerful than any residual reservations or disappointment in Democrats in election after election (not 2024).
The people in the family who have been spreading the data about our depressed brand without also sharing this broader context are doing MAGA's work for them.
Simon, I'm throwing out food for thought here to note that many of us support independent media and pay for subscriptions to pro-democracy outlets like The Bulwark, Meidas, Zeteo, Courier, Lincoln Square etc. It hasn't been discussed as much in HC recently but at one time it was a big point of emphasis to support these outlets.
Many of these outlets are not shy about pointing out all the deficiencies of the Democratic Party, particularly those outlets with never Trumper presence. The weakness of the Democratic brand is a key talking point in the "what's wrong with Dems" articles you often find on some of those sites. I don't know if that is where SteveG is coming from but I can certainly sympathize with the feeling and concern.
The brand issue might not be a problem right now but it will become one if and as soon as we win in 2026. I firmly believe that the Dem brand is in the shitter largely because of lack of confidence in Dem leadership coming from within the Dem base. I still don't think Schumer understands the nature of the battle the country is having and he still thinks there are "mainstream????? Republicans" who believe in democracy.
I share this one because it was right near the top of my unread emails when I returned from walking the dog. If we support independent media we literally can not avoid this stuff.
I’d like to add I like what Stu said in the interview, about how measures of party approval may not matter. It’s about the candidates and the positions and, more importantly, how they rate against the alternative, which right now is maga (no thanks)
I posted this yesterday in the comments after the discussion w Stuart S., repeating it here. I think the "Dems caved" meme oversimplifies what was in reality a complex series of events. Lawrence O'Donnell laid it out pretty well in his A block last night. And as Simon points out, Sen. Baldwin forced them to vote down the ACA extension and Sen. Kaine got them on record re tariffs. And now they have to expose the Epstein horror show.
Whatever got "agreed to" is not final yet, and even if/when Senate passes it, House has to vote on it, and they are 100% not going to go for it. So as Simon says above, stay tuned. We still have the filibuster, that's huge. And we now have Grijalva sworn in, and her constituents have representation at last.
Take the wins when you get them. Yes, we are not happy about how things went down on Sunday night, but sometimes you take the lesser of 2 evils. Normally that's the president's job to make those decisions, but since we don't really have one, the Senate Dems - most of whom are still in strong opposition - are making it for all of us, and the moderates fell on the proverbial sword of caving in a situation they were most likely not going to come out on top of.
This is all just my opinion, and I respect those who disagree, and who are frustrated/"done" w Dems. This is a big tent and still a free country, and we come into this space to share ideas and bat them around.
I really enjoy Dr. Ben-Ghiat's weekly discussions for the same reasons - we toss ideas around and think about them. Often there are not "good" answers, only a bunch of bad alternatives.
I think the Senate Dems 8 had a reasonable case to make for why did what they did. But 1) they didn't make it until after the deal got done 2) they should not have done it so close to the election 3) no one heard them. So while there was a scenario where they came out of this in much better shape the execution of the deal was amateurish and did damage to their case and our broader family. In other words there was a way for them to have pulled this off but they didn't get it done, and we are left with a huge ugly mess.
My basic point here is that it happened, and now we must focus on what comes next, what we do. That is where I am trying to spend my time. What do we do now.....
I agree with Simon. If these 8 had a justification for changing their vote they should've put it out there for their constituents to respond to, not forced it down ALL our throats in the middle of the night!!
Seems to me that getting communications out ahead of time and framing an inevitable loss as a win is the very essence of politics. The whole "Dems have to do better at messaging" point could not be illustrated better. Seriously, a delay of 48 hours, if well spent, could have made all the difference!
Simon - I think you summarized my outrage over how the shutdown ended better than I could have done myself. Also I very much appreciated the tone of your post today: staying focused on the goal, which is paramount, yet giving license to those who feel betrayed to take the requisite time to heal. True leadership and I thank you.
Whatever steps the Democrats take next, they must do better in media than Angus King’s disastrous statement yesterday that standing up to Trump doesn’t work. I’m still working through that one.
Yes, Simon. The optics and messaging of the Caving 8 + Schumer were just terrible. Could they not have waited even 1 week after the elections for us to enjoy our victories and for Rs to sweat some more? They may have been acting on heartfelt principles but they didn't act or sound that way: the vote late on a Sunday night, the Angus King statement that the Dems' strategy wasnt working, and then not having a strong press statement ready. I recognize that the Caving 8 + Schumer are older and therefore not "digital natives," but they didn't even practice proper old school PR and messaging. Most galling and really unforgivable to me was the way Schumer tried to pretend that the 8 acted without his approval, when the group included the minority whip! I left messages for both my Senators (Alsobrooks and Van Hollen) thanking them for their no votes and encouraging them to vote for a new minority leader and whip.
Agree, Meg. I also live in MD and left messages today thanking Alsobrooks and Van Hollen for standing up ( not caving) , and then encouraging them to be stronger, bolder and to rally rest of Dems to that attitude. I didn't comment on Schumer however. I have never been a Schumer fan, think he is poor communicator and too old school, but not sure open hostilities within Dem party helps win back voters or breed confidence. Let the GOP own all the infighting.
I also called and left similar message of acting boldly for J. Raskin plus a plea not to support the CR- which surely he will not support- but provides a hash mark for his ledgers.
I agree with you on not fanning open hostilities within the Dem party. I'm expressing my dismay only within Hopium and in these direct messages today to Alsobrooks and Van Hollen. This is more in the Simon spirit of explaining to our elected Dems, hopefully constructively, how to become the fighting force we need them to be.
You are assuming the media wouldn’t have started blaming Dems as people, especially kids, started to go hungry because they lost their SNAP benefits. It would be typical of them to expect the “Mommy Party” to be the responsible, compassionate grownups who have to save these people. Now they can focus on the single issue of the promised ACA vote and make clear to the public that it’s Republicans who are taking their health care away. If they refuse to allow the vote they lose, if they vote against it they lose. Now that people like ACA coverage they can no longer hide from this issue. As Jared Bernstein points out people are starting to get their letters telling them of the increased prices they will face for ACA coverage. I agree with him and he has been involved in political bargaining for years:
“ I Don't Think The Ds Blew It.
They hit hard and effectively on who's fighting for whom. Their real work of building off this moment starts now.”
I actually share your view that the strategy part was pretty decent. There's a really good case that Ds got as much coverage as possible of how Rs are taking away healthcare and starving people, and delaying the shutdown further would cause the public to sour on Ds as much or more than Rs. And the deal itself sets the Rs up for future pain when they have to show again that they are voting for taking away healthcare.
At the same time, I think the messaging failure is significant. Not only did it piss off the base, but for people who were starting to think Ds had some real piss and vinegar the narrative of caving diminishes interest and excitement.
Lawrence O’Donnell did a great job of explaining the compromise and pointing out that those Dems won concessions like restoring all the back pay of furloughed federal workers and getting INCREASES to SNAP benefits. Funny how the media has buried those facts. Now it’s time to focus on restoring the ACA subsidies and keep hammering that issue home — no intraparty fighting. That needs to be even more the focus than the Epstein files or ICE since those Republican ACA cuts will be disastrous for millions if they don’t get rolled back.
I posted similar thoughts about the comms failure to DailyKos (channeling your writing).
Seems elling that these Senators didn't really see any need to communicate with the base at all - they just don't see that sort of communication as key to their role.
My question to you and others experienced in these sorts of standoffs:
Could the Senate Dems 8 have messaged what they were going to do without tipping their hand too much?
Also, if we had a more robust party in states and nationally, where should the party sit in facilitating communication between electeds and base party members?
Reaching people with your message is extremely difficult in our fragmented news environment and it’s even harder when the media decides whose message they will cover. Contrary to what the media claimed, Biden was constantly doing events to highlight the accomplishments of his administration, especially the new infrastructure and manufacturing projects. Those speeches were rarely shown by the mainstream media.
They did the same thing when Hillary was running, deliberately ignoring her campaign rallies and speeches but obsessively covering Trump’s.
The media hates it when politicians talk about substantive issues. That is why they will cover any utterance/verbal diarrhea that comes out of Trump’s mouth. They know he might say something completely bonkers which they can get in a tizzy over. Those stories write themselves so they’re easy.
I will never forget when the revered “Dean of Washington Journalist’s David Broder complained that Al Gore had talked so much about what he would do if elected that poor ol’ Broder nearly fell asleep. This complaint was about Gore’s acceptance speech — a speech that was enthusiastically received by the Dems at the convention.
very interesting tv last nite, rachel against the cave/compromise, lawrence all in. so the inside beltway crowd just thinks different than us. and it is all very nuanced/complex. there are pros and cons to both. i wonder if the 8 negotiating by themselves caused the repubs spines to stiffen, smelling a cave. and also the bigger issue to me is messaging. there should have been rip roaring speeches targeting satan/repubs for starving americans on purpose, letting the airline travel disintegrate, and not caring one whit about americans losing health care because they can not afford it. sen shaheen actually said
"i hope the republicans hear us". how pathetic is that? we are not in kansas anymore dorothy. in any case, we need to move on and not let this divide us. and who knows what will happen in the house. when rachel gave bernie the chance to diss schumer, he did not. also interesting.
I believe when you have to explain by getting into the weeds of a deal, you've lost the narrative. Also, there are those who truly believe this was a mistake, even knowing what the deal gave us and/or promised. In addition, I believe the way Chuck Schumer handled this appeared, surprisingly, amateurish. He was against the deal but it passed? Nonetheless, here we are now. I believe respectful debate and airing of opinions is healthy. Thank you for always sharing your thoughts and opinions in a respectful manner. Most of us all want the same thing; we just disagree on how to get there. Of course, we are Democrats after all. 💙
josh marshall, lawrence o donnel and dan rather all seem to think this was not at all a catastrophe, with lawrence holding that getting federal workers their back pay is not small potatoes, and the unions were thanking tim kaine yesterday. this was a battle in a long war. we have others to wage, and we need to stay focused.
I sure need some hope right now. The way this was handled by the break away Senators fuels the belief that there are greater non democratic forces influencing the heart of our political system. Why no lead up explanations? Why in the middle of the night? I do not believe it was lack of skill but fear that drove their decision. I know this may be an outlier position but I believe more will come out about why this happened the way that it did.
Still upset about the betrayal, but carrying on. I thanked Senators Smith and Klobuchar for their votes. I also asked them to work to replace Schumer. We need someone to meet this critical moment. I have recently donated to the audacious expansion fund and am working to get a batch of voter reg postcards out to AK before Thanksgiving.
Same message from me to my two senators, Slotkin and Peters. I cannot grasp that Peters, who is retiring, was not one of the 8! Probably wasn't all my phone calls and emails, but I'm taking the win anyway. :)
Leaving the debate over “caving” behind….I’m headed out for a Veterans Day protest on a bike overpass over Highway 101 in Palo Alto. Over the two hours, there will be >10,000 vehicles going by in both directions.
Also, I was the naturalist on a hike organized by Bay Nature magazine, and one of the hikers asked me if I was the Stu Weiss who posts on Hopium! We had a great discussion about how this forum is a way to inject our thinking into the political sphere since Simon is so well connected with the Democratic establishment who read “us.” Among many other topics among the oaks and pines and nature lovers…….
I just got back from the bike bridge protest (and a long bike ride by the Bay with all the birds🦅. I counted 21 people on the bridge, 4 large Stars and Stripes, and many smaller hand-held flags. About 100 vehicles/minute in each direction, so over the two hours we exposed more than 20,000 vehicles to our message. Lot of honks, and of course when we would get a large trucker to honk it felt great. Met many new people, several vets and the usual mix of middle-aged and senior citizens mostly white and some Asian. Compared stories from NoKings2 last month. Great experience, and now I know the regular schedule for that bridge honk and wave, which I will try to work into my bike rides.
I say anyone running in a Senate primary must be asked whether they will vote for Schumer's continued leadership if elected. He has failed as a leader. I don't care about his individual vote. His job was to bring along his caucus in line with his voters. He flunked. And then, we have to elect the best Dems we can get on the ballot.
So are folks not going to support Democratic candidates for the Senate who could win races for they refuse to come out against Schumer? That is going to be a litmus test? So if Mary Peltola leads in Alaska and can win but refuses to condemn Schumer we should withhold support?
I don't understand the logic of this. So if the candidate who wins the primary doesn't condemn Schumer we only don't help them in the primary? But if they win the primary then everything is OK? We have Senate primaries in Maine, Iowa, Texas, critical states, and also in Michigan. If candidates who still support Schumer win in all four do we not support them in this scenario? If so we cannot win the Senate.
I'm talking about primaries in our individual home states. Refusing to support candidates who support surrender is simply being responsible. At home. I've always stayed out of other peoples' primaries. For example, Michiganders are going to have to fight it out for themselves. Going to be interesting. But that's up to Michiganders.
To bring up a well-known quote, they're letting perfect be the enemy of good. That's part of what lost us the presidency and control of Congress last year. I don't mean to catastrophize, but I'm afraid people will be making the same mistake again, and we can't afford that.
I think this thread misses a couple of key points. First, I think there is a high probability that Dems in primaries will be asked the Schumer question no matter what any of us says. Then people will decide in the privacy of the voting booth.
Second, this will be moot in 2028 because, if Schumer runs again, I think AOC will primary him. If AOC primaries him I think Chuck will be taking retirement in 2029. Unfortunately I think the Dems will miss a lot of opportunities to make progress between now and then if Schumer remains as leader.
Respectfully, Simon, I believe the subscriber is articulating a version of Indivisible’s plan to approach the upcoming elections. I admit it sounds confusing as laid out, but it is explained in Indivisible’s recent email.
Lawrence O'Donnell described any Senate Democratic Leader's efforts to corral Democratic Senators' votes as like trying to 'herd cats'. He also made the point that any Senator has multiple opportunities to sway the opinions of their fellow Senators. The long and short of it is that, unlike the clones in the Republican Party, any Democratic leader is likely to fail if the standard for success is full agreement among his or her caucus. That said, I'm not arguing either way on Sen. Schumer's behalf.
My MAGA-rep posted today on social media thanking all veterans. One constituent replied about Trump's cuts to vets. Another denied there were any cuts.
Some data posted to challenge that second comment:
- 1.2 million veterans receive aid through the federally funded supplemental nutritional access program, or SNAP. Working-age veterans face an elevated risk of experiencing food insecurity compared to their nonveteran peers. Veterans' families also receive assistance through Medicaid. Trump's deep cuts to those programs hit veterans hard.
- Trump has made a near 20% cut in VA staffing. Staff shortages have led to long wait times for care. These wait times vary from days to months, with some VA clinics still so understaffed that they are unable to take new patients for primary care or mental health needs.
Trump is no friend of those he once referred to as "suckers and losers."
I listened to a podcaster say that, when applying for a job at WalMart, the company also includes an application for SNAP ("food stamps") for convenience -- as many of the working poor depend on SNAP.
He went on to say that the failure of SNAP benefits going out has really hit WalMart's bottom line. It makes sense since so many spend their SNAP benefits there.
I thought I’d share this piece from Josh Marshall of TPM. He went hard on Schumer last March but credited the Democrats for upping their game in the shutdown, with a “fumble” at the end. Actually similar to what Simon is saying. I saw a similar post from Tim Miller. The shutdown really was worth it, and there’s an argument to be made that it was at least a partial win for Democrats, perhaps more than that.
Also, the shutdown pierced the wall of oblivion that surrounds most voters, the ones who don't follow politics the way we do which is the vast majority. Points went up on the board for the fighting Dems as evidenced in the election. Now "they", these voters, will be happy the shutdown ended and they can go home for Thanksgiving. Believe me, they aren't following every nuance of the Dems actions, just the top of the toplines.
Unfortunately for them, but ultimately fortunate for us, is that the agony to come will make them hate this regime even more. Sadly, many people (voters) don't understand what's happening until they really feel it personally. The Dems had little to no chance of getting anything. The "leverage" is all in our heads. These fascists don't care who they hurt and they are not going to budge. Yet.
Experiments are messy. We have to dig in and remain hopeful that we can get the train back on track. Most of us are not happy with this latest move but today is another day. Mid terms are right around the bend.
MSNBC did a segment on judges that have been confirmed this year. They are having to prove their loyalty by denying Jan. 6 happened. Why are Democrats voting for them? 15 Democrats voted to confirt these unqualified judges for lifetime appointments. WHY? Who are they? They need to be voted out. No democrat should be voting for any trump judges.
Look, the 8 Senate Dems had a defensible position here (I've flown in the past week and it was hell, people need their SNAP benefits, etc.). But they (i) waited until after the deal closed to explain themselves, (ii) did it after a resounding win for Dems on Tuesday when they had the most power, and (iii) had horrible messaging. And Tim Kaine saying "Oh, well, there were others who wanted to do this, so don't blame just us" is tone deaf and really missing the point.
(Like, even Fetterman has said that his position is "I don't agree with shutdowns." That's better than Kaine's!)
Just looks like amateur hour, not a well-orchestrated outcome.
Senate Dems should've just been honest: "Look, Republicans were literally going to let people starve to death. We're not going to play chicken with people's lives because we're not sociopaths. We backed down on this one, but we're not done fighting. And maybe stop electing monsters who weaponize hunger?"
Look - you just gave the weak 8 their talking points fantastically! If only those Senators had an ounce of political acumen, they could have avoided the appearance of weakness with just a few, true statements! So disappointing and frustrating.
I think you mean they have to defend the indefensible! I would not want to face voters having risked snap benefits, taken away health care and closing eyes to the obvious war crimes being committed. Good luck. As Gavin said in Texas, they poked the bear and I believe all of us are bears not just the California bear!
Here's how we know the DSAers and Bernie Bros leading the attacks on Schumer over the shutdown deal are actually using it as pretext for an internal hostile takeover attempt: not only are they attacking Schumer even though he voted against the deal, they're rabidly attacking Hakeem Jeffries, who is whipping his caucus against the deal.
The deal, by the way, is a lot better than the lefty coup plotters (and the covert MAGA bot accounts amplifying their attacks) make it out to be
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/shutdown-congress-republicans-democrats-deal-b2861825.html
What deal? It was a capitulation... a cave. Senate Democrats traded away their one point of leverage for the promise of a vote on ACA, aka they got nothing.
Wrong, Michael. It was actually a win that the Bernie Bro wreckers are trying to turn into a loss to serve their goal of hijacking the party they hate.
If your DSA and Bernie Bro friends really were upset about the shutdown deal, why are they attacking Schumer AND JEFFRIES, who oppose the deal? It's a hostile takeover attempt as they've been trying since 2015
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/shutdown-congress-republicans-democrats-deal-b2861825.html
Because putin is working BOTH sides of the aisle. Putin wants to divide the left and the left. The right and the righhhhht. Etc.
(Like) -- After the rush of resounding victories on Tuesday, the decisions made late Sunday opened up a vulnerability. One that the enemies of Democrats are trying to exploit.
Hi Nana Booboo
I don't see anything in the linked article that supports your accusation of DSAers and Bernie Bros leading attacks on Schumer. Personally, I would say we don't know Schumer's true feelings about the deal but if he was truly against it but couldn't keep 8 senators from voting for it then it seems he has lost control of the caucus at minimum. I would also note that with 8 voting for it, there was cover for Schumer if he was for it but voted against it to keep from angering the rest of the caucus and most of the base.
The article seems to put out the idea that some Republican senators might vote to retain the ACA subsidies. If that proves to be the case, then "the deal" will have more merit. I don't hold out much hope for that but it might happen.
One thing is for certain, the fight I want for the next CR/shutdown battle at the end of January is full throated we worn't fund the Trump regime's effort to destroy the rule of law, our democratic republic form of government. We have to make it bigger than a one point policy battle.
First of all, I agree 100% with your last paragraph and that J30 is a key milestone to aim for.
Secondly, Schumer is compromised, he has lost the confidence of the American people. He is the face of the old school generation and it's time for a new face to represent " the big, broad tent" of pro-democracy.
Indivisible is calling for new leadership that will stand up to the fascist autocrats, i.e. someone to meet the moment we are in.They are going after incumbants in the primary season. People power.
Thinking that way doesn't make me a radical leftist, Nana, just an informed pro-democracy activist like you with a different opinion from yours.
While it doesn’t help to dwell on it, it is exceedingly dangerous to misrepresent or delude ourselves about what happened. This was an epic collapse of an entire political party orchestrated by 7 clueless Senators—a political miscalculation the likes of which we may never see again in our lifetimes. Truly. And the more we learn, it just gets worse. We are squarely in the realm of unfathomable at this point.
We have to deal with it. Move forward. Try somehow to be positive, and rebuild support with those who are now disillusioned with Democrats. We have lot of work to do.
And again, the worst thing we can do now is to pretend and act like this deal was somehow OK or something less than terrible. That’s a cult no one wants to join.
Thanks, Simon! Happy Veterans Day to all the Hopium veterans.
This morning, Trump is rage posting about Obama -- another clear sign of Alzheimer's. Obama gave Trump the worst narcissistic injury of Trump's life and Trump's addled brain keeps taking Trump back to those painful moments at the press dinner. He's so clearly unhinged.
I'm writing postcards for Aftyn Behn this morning and baking cookies to send a care package to my grandson. We're in a marathon, not a sprint.
Thank you, Catherine. (US Navy -- 71~78) Am sending a small donation today to Behn's campaign.
Will add a comment about vets too.
(on edit > donation sent) ... 60 years ago today -- on the Detroit music charts -- a single by James Brown called "I Got You." appeared. I feel good.
I'm writing Aftyn postcards too, with postcardstovoters.org!! Happy Veterans Day to you too Catherine, and your lucky grandson :)
Simon, Your Hopium is contagious. One thing, imo, you fail to note - in comprehensively cataloging the electoral (polling) weaknesses of the GOP and the absolute disgrace of the Red Wave polling outfits - is the polling weakness of the Congressional Dems. Their approval rating is in the gutter just a few points ahead of the GOP and behind Trump. Stunts like the other night don’t help and only increase cynicism.
Steve, we've addressed this here and what you write here is not correct. In the polls that matter for both the 2025 and 2026 elections - Party ID, generic ballot, who is more trusted on the economy - the Dems now hold sturdy leads. This talking point about the weakness of the Democratic Party brand absent this other context is in essence misinformation. For we just won a blow out election; have been overperforming all across the country in election after election; and yes while what has happened is not good for our family and our enthusiasm we don't yet know how this will all play out; and as I've been saying for many years the most powerful force in our politics today is fear and opposition to MAGA. It has proven to be more powerful than any residual reservations or disappointment in Democrats in election after election (not 2024).
The people in the family who have been spreading the data about our depressed brand without also sharing this broader context are doing MAGA's work for them.
Simon, I was referring to this specifically:
You Gov:
Dem Congressional Approval
9/25/25
Approval 34%
Disapproval 60.9%
You are certainly right in regard to issues and generic ballot.
Simon, I'm throwing out food for thought here to note that many of us support independent media and pay for subscriptions to pro-democracy outlets like The Bulwark, Meidas, Zeteo, Courier, Lincoln Square etc. It hasn't been discussed as much in HC recently but at one time it was a big point of emphasis to support these outlets.
Many of these outlets are not shy about pointing out all the deficiencies of the Democratic Party, particularly those outlets with never Trumper presence. The weakness of the Democratic brand is a key talking point in the "what's wrong with Dems" articles you often find on some of those sites. I don't know if that is where SteveG is coming from but I can certainly sympathize with the feeling and concern.
The brand issue might not be a problem right now but it will become one if and as soon as we win in 2026. I firmly believe that the Dem brand is in the shitter largely because of lack of confidence in Dem leadership coming from within the Dem base. I still don't think Schumer understands the nature of the battle the country is having and he still thinks there are "mainstream????? Republicans" who believe in democracy.
I share this one because it was right near the top of my unread emails when I returned from walking the dog. If we support independent media we literally can not avoid this stuff.
https://www.lincolnsquare.media/p/rick-wilsons-ama-where-the-dems-went?utm_source=substack&publication_id=3561893&post_id=178549382&utm_medium=email&utm_content=share&utm_campaign=email-share&triggerShare=true&isFreemail=false&r=nblx&triedRedirect=true
I’d like to add I like what Stu said in the interview, about how measures of party approval may not matter. It’s about the candidates and the positions and, more importantly, how they rate against the alternative, which right now is maga (no thanks)
I certainly agree with that. Thx
Thanks, this is what I wanted to say.
I posted this yesterday in the comments after the discussion w Stuart S., repeating it here. I think the "Dems caved" meme oversimplifies what was in reality a complex series of events. Lawrence O'Donnell laid it out pretty well in his A block last night. And as Simon points out, Sen. Baldwin forced them to vote down the ACA extension and Sen. Kaine got them on record re tariffs. And now they have to expose the Epstein horror show.
Whatever got "agreed to" is not final yet, and even if/when Senate passes it, House has to vote on it, and they are 100% not going to go for it. So as Simon says above, stay tuned. We still have the filibuster, that's huge. And we now have Grijalva sworn in, and her constituents have representation at last.
Take the wins when you get them. Yes, we are not happy about how things went down on Sunday night, but sometimes you take the lesser of 2 evils. Normally that's the president's job to make those decisions, but since we don't really have one, the Senate Dems - most of whom are still in strong opposition - are making it for all of us, and the moderates fell on the proverbial sword of caving in a situation they were most likely not going to come out on top of.
This is all just my opinion, and I respect those who disagree, and who are frustrated/"done" w Dems. This is a big tent and still a free country, and we come into this space to share ideas and bat them around.
I really enjoy Dr. Ben-Ghiat's weekly discussions for the same reasons - we toss ideas around and think about them. Often there are not "good" answers, only a bunch of bad alternatives.
Keep going!
I think the Senate Dems 8 had a reasonable case to make for why did what they did. But 1) they didn't make it until after the deal got done 2) they should not have done it so close to the election 3) no one heard them. So while there was a scenario where they came out of this in much better shape the execution of the deal was amateurish and did damage to their case and our broader family. In other words there was a way for them to have pulled this off but they didn't get it done, and we are left with a huge ugly mess.
My basic point here is that it happened, and now we must focus on what comes next, what we do. That is where I am trying to spend my time. What do we do now.....
I agree with Simon. If these 8 had a justification for changing their vote they should've put it out there for their constituents to respond to, not forced it down ALL our throats in the middle of the night!!
Seems to me that getting communications out ahead of time and framing an inevitable loss as a win is the very essence of politics. The whole "Dems have to do better at messaging" point could not be illustrated better. Seriously, a delay of 48 hours, if well spent, could have made all the difference!
Simon - I think you summarized my outrage over how the shutdown ended better than I could have done myself. Also I very much appreciated the tone of your post today: staying focused on the goal, which is paramount, yet giving license to those who feel betrayed to take the requisite time to heal. True leadership and I thank you.
Whatever steps the Democrats take next, they must do better in media than Angus King’s disastrous statement yesterday that standing up to Trump doesn’t work. I’m still working through that one.
He said that????
He did indeed.
Yes, he said that.
Not disagreeing w anything you said. You said it a lot better than I did!
Yes, Simon. The optics and messaging of the Caving 8 + Schumer were just terrible. Could they not have waited even 1 week after the elections for us to enjoy our victories and for Rs to sweat some more? They may have been acting on heartfelt principles but they didn't act or sound that way: the vote late on a Sunday night, the Angus King statement that the Dems' strategy wasnt working, and then not having a strong press statement ready. I recognize that the Caving 8 + Schumer are older and therefore not "digital natives," but they didn't even practice proper old school PR and messaging. Most galling and really unforgivable to me was the way Schumer tried to pretend that the 8 acted without his approval, when the group included the minority whip! I left messages for both my Senators (Alsobrooks and Van Hollen) thanking them for their no votes and encouraging them to vote for a new minority leader and whip.
Agree, Meg. I also live in MD and left messages today thanking Alsobrooks and Van Hollen for standing up ( not caving) , and then encouraging them to be stronger, bolder and to rally rest of Dems to that attitude. I didn't comment on Schumer however. I have never been a Schumer fan, think he is poor communicator and too old school, but not sure open hostilities within Dem party helps win back voters or breed confidence. Let the GOP own all the infighting.
I also called and left similar message of acting boldly for J. Raskin plus a plea not to support the CR- which surely he will not support- but provides a hash mark for his ledgers.
I agree with you on not fanning open hostilities within the Dem party. I'm expressing my dismay only within Hopium and in these direct messages today to Alsobrooks and Van Hollen. This is more in the Simon spirit of explaining to our elected Dems, hopefully constructively, how to become the fighting force we need them to be.
You are assuming the media wouldn’t have started blaming Dems as people, especially kids, started to go hungry because they lost their SNAP benefits. It would be typical of them to expect the “Mommy Party” to be the responsible, compassionate grownups who have to save these people. Now they can focus on the single issue of the promised ACA vote and make clear to the public that it’s Republicans who are taking their health care away. If they refuse to allow the vote they lose, if they vote against it they lose. Now that people like ACA coverage they can no longer hide from this issue. As Jared Bernstein points out people are starting to get their letters telling them of the increased prices they will face for ACA coverage. I agree with him and he has been involved in political bargaining for years:
“ I Don't Think The Ds Blew It.
They hit hard and effectively on who's fighting for whom. Their real work of building off this moment starts now.”
https://econjared.substack.com/p/i-dont-think-the-ds-blew-it
I actually share your view that the strategy part was pretty decent. There's a really good case that Ds got as much coverage as possible of how Rs are taking away healthcare and starving people, and delaying the shutdown further would cause the public to sour on Ds as much or more than Rs. And the deal itself sets the Rs up for future pain when they have to show again that they are voting for taking away healthcare.
At the same time, I think the messaging failure is significant. Not only did it piss off the base, but for people who were starting to think Ds had some real piss and vinegar the narrative of caving diminishes interest and excitement.
Lawrence O’Donnell did a great job of explaining the compromise and pointing out that those Dems won concessions like restoring all the back pay of furloughed federal workers and getting INCREASES to SNAP benefits. Funny how the media has buried those facts. Now it’s time to focus on restoring the ACA subsidies and keep hammering that issue home — no intraparty fighting. That needs to be even more the focus than the Epstein files or ICE since those Republican ACA cuts will be disastrous for millions if they don’t get rolled back.
I posted similar thoughts about the comms failure to DailyKos (channeling your writing).
Seems elling that these Senators didn't really see any need to communicate with the base at all - they just don't see that sort of communication as key to their role.
My question to you and others experienced in these sorts of standoffs:
Could the Senate Dems 8 have messaged what they were going to do without tipping their hand too much?
Also, if we had a more robust party in states and nationally, where should the party sit in facilitating communication between electeds and base party members?
Reaching people with your message is extremely difficult in our fragmented news environment and it’s even harder when the media decides whose message they will cover. Contrary to what the media claimed, Biden was constantly doing events to highlight the accomplishments of his administration, especially the new infrastructure and manufacturing projects. Those speeches were rarely shown by the mainstream media.
They did the same thing when Hillary was running, deliberately ignoring her campaign rallies and speeches but obsessively covering Trump’s.
The media hates it when politicians talk about substantive issues. That is why they will cover any utterance/verbal diarrhea that comes out of Trump’s mouth. They know he might say something completely bonkers which they can get in a tizzy over. Those stories write themselves so they’re easy.
I will never forget when the revered “Dean of Washington Journalist’s David Broder complained that Al Gore had talked so much about what he would do if elected that poor ol’ Broder nearly fell asleep. This complaint was about Gore’s acceptance speech — a speech that was enthusiastically received by the Dems at the convention.
very interesting tv last nite, rachel against the cave/compromise, lawrence all in. so the inside beltway crowd just thinks different than us. and it is all very nuanced/complex. there are pros and cons to both. i wonder if the 8 negotiating by themselves caused the repubs spines to stiffen, smelling a cave. and also the bigger issue to me is messaging. there should have been rip roaring speeches targeting satan/repubs for starving americans on purpose, letting the airline travel disintegrate, and not caring one whit about americans losing health care because they can not afford it. sen shaheen actually said
"i hope the republicans hear us". how pathetic is that? we are not in kansas anymore dorothy. in any case, we need to move on and not let this divide us. and who knows what will happen in the house. when rachel gave bernie the chance to diss schumer, he did not. also interesting.
I believe when you have to explain by getting into the weeds of a deal, you've lost the narrative. Also, there are those who truly believe this was a mistake, even knowing what the deal gave us and/or promised. In addition, I believe the way Chuck Schumer handled this appeared, surprisingly, amateurish. He was against the deal but it passed? Nonetheless, here we are now. I believe respectful debate and airing of opinions is healthy. Thank you for always sharing your thoughts and opinions in a respectful manner. Most of us all want the same thing; we just disagree on how to get there. Of course, we are Democrats after all. 💙
josh marshall, lawrence o donnel and dan rather all seem to think this was not at all a catastrophe, with lawrence holding that getting federal workers their back pay is not small potatoes, and the unions were thanking tim kaine yesterday. this was a battle in a long war. we have others to wage, and we need to stay focused.
yes, long war
Hello Hopium
I sure need some hope right now. The way this was handled by the break away Senators fuels the belief that there are greater non democratic forces influencing the heart of our political system. Why no lead up explanations? Why in the middle of the night? I do not believe it was lack of skill but fear that drove their decision. I know this may be an outlier position but I believe more will come out about why this happened the way that it did.
Still upset about the betrayal, but carrying on. I thanked Senators Smith and Klobuchar for their votes. I also asked them to work to replace Schumer. We need someone to meet this critical moment. I have recently donated to the audacious expansion fund and am working to get a batch of voter reg postcards out to AK before Thanksgiving.
I've also sent the same message (written and phone) to Senators Booker and Kim.
Same message from me to my two senators, Slotkin and Peters. I cannot grasp that Peters, who is retiring, was not one of the 8! Probably wasn't all my phone calls and emails, but I'm taking the win anyway. :)
Simon: I believe that someone has set up a rogue Simon Rosenberg Substack. It is coming up under SimonRosenberg @simonrosenberg156970
Heads up Simon. Your title should read Indefensible….not ….Defensible. .
Or am I missing something.?
Ug. Fixed it. Thank you.
I’m guessing early this morning you were another victim of Autocorrect =:o
Happens to me all the time :)
Leaving the debate over “caving” behind….I’m headed out for a Veterans Day protest on a bike overpass over Highway 101 in Palo Alto. Over the two hours, there will be >10,000 vehicles going by in both directions.
Also, I was the naturalist on a hike organized by Bay Nature magazine, and one of the hikers asked me if I was the Stu Weiss who posts on Hopium! We had a great discussion about how this forum is a way to inject our thinking into the political sphere since Simon is so well connected with the Democratic establishment who read “us.” Among many other topics among the oaks and pines and nature lovers…….
How fun! A Hopium follower spotted in the wild!
Yes, that was me! I’m going to claim the wild title. It’s the first chuckle I’ve had since Sunday. 😀
Hi Bobbie! Glad we could share our “wild” encounter with the community and get so many likes!
I just got back from the bike bridge protest (and a long bike ride by the Bay with all the birds🦅. I counted 21 people on the bridge, 4 large Stars and Stripes, and many smaller hand-held flags. About 100 vehicles/minute in each direction, so over the two hours we exposed more than 20,000 vehicles to our message. Lot of honks, and of course when we would get a large trucker to honk it felt great. Met many new people, several vets and the usual mix of middle-aged and senior citizens mostly white and some Asian. Compared stories from NoKings2 last month. Great experience, and now I know the regular schedule for that bridge honk and wave, which I will try to work into my bike rides.
I say anyone running in a Senate primary must be asked whether they will vote for Schumer's continued leadership if elected. He has failed as a leader. I don't care about his individual vote. His job was to bring along his caucus in line with his voters. He flunked. And then, we have to elect the best Dems we can get on the ballot.
So are folks not going to support Democratic candidates for the Senate who could win races for they refuse to come out against Schumer? That is going to be a litmus test? So if Mary Peltola leads in Alaska and can win but refuses to condemn Schumer we should withhold support?
I would support whoever wins a Dem primary. But I would not support any Dem pol in a primary who is on board with Schumer. He apparently can't lead.
Is the Alaska ranked choice thing such that this is impossible? Obviously, not any Alaskan.
I don't understand the logic of this. So if the candidate who wins the primary doesn't condemn Schumer we only don't help them in the primary? But if they win the primary then everything is OK? We have Senate primaries in Maine, Iowa, Texas, critical states, and also in Michigan. If candidates who still support Schumer win in all four do we not support them in this scenario? If so we cannot win the Senate.
I thought we weren't supposed to get involved in primaries......
I'm talking about primaries in our individual home states. Refusing to support candidates who support surrender is simply being responsible. At home. I've always stayed out of other peoples' primaries. For example, Michiganders are going to have to fight it out for themselves. Going to be interesting. But that's up to Michiganders.
To bring up a well-known quote, they're letting perfect be the enemy of good. That's part of what lost us the presidency and control of Congress last year. I don't mean to catastrophize, but I'm afraid people will be making the same mistake again, and we can't afford that.
I think this thread misses a couple of key points. First, I think there is a high probability that Dems in primaries will be asked the Schumer question no matter what any of us says. Then people will decide in the privacy of the voting booth.
Second, this will be moot in 2028 because, if Schumer runs again, I think AOC will primary him. If AOC primaries him I think Chuck will be taking retirement in 2029. Unfortunately I think the Dems will miss a lot of opportunities to make progress between now and then if Schumer remains as leader.
Respectfully, Simon, I believe the subscriber is articulating a version of Indivisible’s plan to approach the upcoming elections. I admit it sounds confusing as laid out, but it is explained in Indivisible’s recent email.
Lawrence O'Donnell described any Senate Democratic Leader's efforts to corral Democratic Senators' votes as like trying to 'herd cats'. He also made the point that any Senator has multiple opportunities to sway the opinions of their fellow Senators. The long and short of it is that, unlike the clones in the Republican Party, any Democratic leader is likely to fail if the standard for success is full agreement among his or her caucus. That said, I'm not arguing either way on Sen. Schumer's behalf.
Both LBJ and Harry Reid successfully herded Senate cats in my lifetime. FWIW.
My MAGA-rep posted today on social media thanking all veterans. One constituent replied about Trump's cuts to vets. Another denied there were any cuts.
Some data posted to challenge that second comment:
- 1.2 million veterans receive aid through the federally funded supplemental nutritional access program, or SNAP. Working-age veterans face an elevated risk of experiencing food insecurity compared to their nonveteran peers. Veterans' families also receive assistance through Medicaid. Trump's deep cuts to those programs hit veterans hard.
- Trump has made a near 20% cut in VA staffing. Staff shortages have led to long wait times for care. These wait times vary from days to months, with some VA clinics still so understaffed that they are unable to take new patients for primary care or mental health needs.
Trump is no friend of those he once referred to as "suckers and losers."
I listened to a podcaster say that, when applying for a job at WalMart, the company also includes an application for SNAP ("food stamps") for convenience -- as many of the working poor depend on SNAP.
He went on to say that the failure of SNAP benefits going out has really hit WalMart's bottom line. It makes sense since so many spend their SNAP benefits there.
I thought I’d share this piece from Josh Marshall of TPM. He went hard on Schumer last March but credited the Democrats for upping their game in the shutdown, with a “fumble” at the end. Actually similar to what Simon is saying. I saw a similar post from Tim Miller. The shutdown really was worth it, and there’s an argument to be made that it was at least a partial win for Democrats, perhaps more than that.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/a-quick-take-on-team-caves-big-win/sharetoken/90f20333-0fec-4bdc-ae5c-056dc91fb380
The Shutdown was a huge win for us, not a loss. I still think we should have kept fighting.
I almost used the fumble analogy today in my own piece. It's a fumble and they scored but the game is far from over.
Also, the shutdown pierced the wall of oblivion that surrounds most voters, the ones who don't follow politics the way we do which is the vast majority. Points went up on the board for the fighting Dems as evidenced in the election. Now "they", these voters, will be happy the shutdown ended and they can go home for Thanksgiving. Believe me, they aren't following every nuance of the Dems actions, just the top of the toplines.
Unfortunately for them, but ultimately fortunate for us, is that the agony to come will make them hate this regime even more. Sadly, many people (voters) don't understand what's happening until they really feel it personally. The Dems had little to no chance of getting anything. The "leverage" is all in our heads. These fascists don't care who they hurt and they are not going to budge. Yet.
Experiments are messy. We have to dig in and remain hopeful that we can get the train back on track. Most of us are not happy with this latest move but today is another day. Mid terms are right around the bend.
MSNBC did a segment on judges that have been confirmed this year. They are having to prove their loyalty by denying Jan. 6 happened. Why are Democrats voting for them? 15 Democrats voted to confirt these unqualified judges for lifetime appointments. WHY? Who are they? They need to be voted out. No democrat should be voting for any trump judges.
Look, the 8 Senate Dems had a defensible position here (I've flown in the past week and it was hell, people need their SNAP benefits, etc.). But they (i) waited until after the deal closed to explain themselves, (ii) did it after a resounding win for Dems on Tuesday when they had the most power, and (iii) had horrible messaging. And Tim Kaine saying "Oh, well, there were others who wanted to do this, so don't blame just us" is tone deaf and really missing the point.
(Like, even Fetterman has said that his position is "I don't agree with shutdowns." That's better than Kaine's!)
Just looks like amateur hour, not a well-orchestrated outcome.
Senate Dems should've just been honest: "Look, Republicans were literally going to let people starve to death. We're not going to play chicken with people's lives because we're not sociopaths. We backed down on this one, but we're not done fighting. And maybe stop electing monsters who weaponize hunger?"
I like the cut of your jib, and your verbiage.
100% exactly how they should all be speaking, loudly & clearly!! but they didnt. that's the bigger problem. what is the point of a "meek" cave?
Look - you just gave the weak 8 their talking points fantastically! If only those Senators had an ounce of political acumen, they could have avoided the appearance of weakness with just a few, true statements! So disappointing and frustrating.
I think you mean they have to defend the indefensible! I would not want to face voters having risked snap benefits, taken away health care and closing eyes to the obvious war crimes being committed. Good luck. As Gavin said in Texas, they poked the bear and I believe all of us are bears not just the California bear!
Don’t you mean the indefensible, Simon!