It doesn’t get more pathetic than this.

Oh I disagree that the Democrats won't be more pathetic than this.

top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 352 points 1 year ago (19 children)

It literally was. His approval was collapsing. Why the fuck is this so hard for anyone with an ounce of power?

  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 128 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    They like retaining power more than actually standing up for what is right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I got news about that retention with the direction we are going

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Pretty sure all the ones that did this aren't up for election.
    These slimy fucks just used the shutdown to win the elections.

    We need to impeach them, or somehow get the electorate to have a memory longer than a goldfish

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The ones that voted are either A) Retiring, or B) Not up for Reelection in '26, yes.

    They almost certainly did this either under pressure from the air travel lobby to not let this disrupt the thanksgiving air travel season, or because they were actually worried that Trump was going to get enough votes to nuke the filibuster.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 50 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Oh, I think about the rich... Lately, I've been thinking about them a whole lot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Ezra Klein had an interesting take which was that the shutdown was to actually to bring attention to the healthcare subsidy issue in a very public way, even though they knew Trump would never negotiate on the issue in the end. But now they have a massive policy cudgel, and the media initiative heading into the midterms.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 158 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    We've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 92 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Uhh, more Americans blamed Republicans and Trump's approval tanked.

    This guy is full of fucking shit. There was no reason relent and it would've set Dems up for success next year.

    Primary them all.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Primary them, and then they'll ratfuck your progressive candidates, and run third party if they lose.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    You're not wrong sadly:

    • We saw that with Cuomo going Independent against Mamdani
    • We saw Sinema flip Independent
    • We saw basically the same thing when DINO billionaire Bloomberg derailed Sanders and Warren in 2020.
    • We'll almost certainly see Fetterman do the same thing.

    At least with Mamdani's case, it was worth trying.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 78 points 1 year ago

    How the fuck would he know?

  • source
  • [–] 68 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    LESS THAN ONE FUCKING WEEK AFTER SWEEPING ELECTION DAY

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 54 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (11 children)

    Did King really believe this, or were there other reasons why he caved? His son, Angus King III, is running for governor of Maine, and Senator King’s decision may have been a misguided attempt to help him. King is also not up for reelection until 2030, so perhaps he thought he could escape electoral consequences.

    Isn't the election already over? How does caving now help? And if the gubernatorial election hasn't happened yet, well, vote for the other Democratic candidate, I guess?

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago* (10 children)

    It’s probably a move to appease the corporate donors. I believe it kicks the can for the shutdown to be next year since it’s pretty much guaranteed to happen again.

    Dems made them promise to put those ACA measures back in next year. They can light a fire under Republicans during midterms if they don’t stick to their word and there could even be another shutdown which would tank Republicans at the polls.

    It was a weak move to cave this time around, but there’s a lot of room to demand even more when it’s right around midterms.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Dems made them promise to put those ACA measures back in next year.

    They got Thune to promise a separate vote in the senate on the ACA credits, probably in December. Even if that passed in the senate, Johnson won't schedule a vote on it in the house. And if by some miracle it passed the house, Trump would just veto it.

    It's nothing. It's absolutely nothing. At most they got Republicans to vote against ACA credits specifically, which is nothing compared to other shit they've already voted on, and will be far less effective than letting them take the heat for the shut down. The fact that they were willing to prolong the shut down just to kill the ACA credits says a lot more than a simple vote would.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Even if trump were to sign it, enrollment ends on December 15th, so agreeing to hold a vote in December basically guarantees people will be hit with higher premiums which is what they were fighting to avoid.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    Blue states need to implement their own public healthcare options. The longer we rely on the Federal government for it, the more likely it gets taken away at this point in time. People living in Purple and Red states will be the ones demanding it if all the Blue states are not even using it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Dems made them promise

    Can't trust the promise of liars. They threw it all away for a promise of a vote that will never fucking happen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    If Dems are smart they would use the failure to deliver on that promise by Republicans and the possibility of another shutdown to pass positive legislation leading up to midterms.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    This was the only leverage dems had for this congressional budget year. They gave it up for a vote on a single concession, which will be voted against.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Corporations likely came in requesting things to open back up else a lot of the corporate donor money would stop. It was not a good move to fold, imo, they likely are aiming to make this a next year’s issue.

    If Republicans vote against the concession then that will make even Republican voters upset, since so many people depend on having lower health insurance premiums via the ACA subsidies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Millenials, Gen Z this is your chance. Start running to take congress and senate positions in the next elections. Or find new people to support. Things do not have to stay the way they have been. There is enough of the voting population outside of the boomer gen now to change voting outcomes but you need to put yourself out there and not hope for someone else to do it for you.
    In the meantime, do what you can with your spending. Don't send any money to billionaires even if that means giving up stuff you currently buy. Time to start starving the billionaire class since the (current) governments are owned by them.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    "Man who climbed halfway up small hill before giving up says reaching the top is impossible"

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 34 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Oh boy is that sad. Standing up to Trump works just fine. To put it politely, you get fucked for sure when you roll over, at least when you stand up there's a chance.

  • source
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago

    Well this is pretty much exactly what Republicans needed.

    They pitched that they were perfectly willing to be reasonable and the democrats were the crazy ones.

    Now they pass an extension, specifying to block the non-existent illegal immigrant gap and say "see, we were ready to take care of the people, but the democrats forced things to be bad, and these few democrats reluctantly came over which just proves they were in the wrong"

    Another chunk of what I assume is their strategy: Make 2025 bad in ways to make it easier to make 2026 feel great by comparison.

  • source
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago

    Remember how well "if you can't fight them, join them!" worked for all of those people in Nazi Germany and WW2? Definitely caving in to the Nazis was a smart move...

    Trump is a loser piece of shit wannabe Nazi, you don't cave to Nazis, you fight them at all costs because caving is always worse than you think it is.

  • source
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago

    Tbf you'd have to actually try first instead of caving immediately.

  • source
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    2025 elections said what? 🤔

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    None of them are up for re-election in 2026.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago

    The Democrats don't do shit except send me weekly texts from ActBlue begging for money. That's the only time I hear from them or there is some outreach. I'll never send a cent ever again. The state of our country is partially their fault for not even maintaining a functional party with candidates that don't require holding your nose.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago

    Just make him a fucking king already then, you spineless mollusks. That'll make your jobs much easier so you won't have to make hard decisions like choosing to fight for your constituents.

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago

    Senator Angus King is in the Trump/Epstein files confirmed.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I wonder who paid him off.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    It was working until some cowards gave in.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    "Standing up to trump didnt work.. sure republicans were panicking and melting down at the overwhelming support democrats had at the time, literally convinced the GOP was on the verge of extinction, and had the overwhelming majority of people blaming Republicans for it all..

    but I didnt want to risk the ACA subsudies actually going through, cause thats what I've already built my next campaign around, so we gave trump everything he wanted without getting a single thing"

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    In any other circumstance, this would be the end of the conversation. There's no point in further conversation because even when their entire job is literally "do nothing", they refuse to do it. So, you walk away, tell Security to remove them from the building, and let them know all further communication will be done through legal representation.

    The fact that this isn't happening shows that the entire system was doomed to begin with.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    They're not up for reelection next cycle, so they're already getting fired, it's just too bad that's not happening for several months and it already fucked this particular situation and everything behind it (and they'll do it again before they're gone).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    The Democrats who caved just happened to be all safe in their districts with no upcoming elections. This is strategic like everything in politics. They stood to make more money by caving so it wasn't just these eight, it was a group decision.

    Not solving healthcare will of course work to their advantage. Gotta keep dangling that affordable healthcare carrot. Did you expect them to tackle another big important issue?

    I wonder if I am getting little too cynical sometimes but the Democrats always convince I am not.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    Pretending to have a spine for a few weeks must have been exhausting. Cowardly idiot.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Being a democrat is like having commanding officers most of which cannot grasp which end of a gun the bullets come from.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Unfit for office.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    "Standing Up to Trump Didn't Work...so I took the money and decided to get out of politics" FTFY

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    And giving him what he wants will. Goodbye and good riddance you braindead meatbags

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    Caving to Trump, though, works just great -- for Trump and GOP, Certainly not for amyone else, such as theUS public,

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    He's 81 and in for reelection in 2030?
    (Last year he won over two other candidates like 15 years younger than him, still over retirement age.)

    Who are his sponsors/who does he work for?
    Was it about air travel?

    If Olympic games/basketball/hockey/etc would be chosen by vote USA teams would all be over 80 probably.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    He has to go. POS.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Nothing says "journalism" like repeating the content of a televised interview and getting the name of Maine's governor wrong.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago* (17 children)

    I've heard this argument that the deal they got wasn't going to get any better in a few places. What are the counter arguments to that?
    Because it was working, trumps numbers are down a bit, the election losses. But those didn't phase the Republicans at all seemingly. I personally think they still should have held out, but I don't have any logic for my stance. Is there any?

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago* (13 children)

    Yes. All the same logic for dealing with a bully. The next "deal" will be worse. Now they know they can push as hard as they want and the opposition will always cave. This was the one chance the Dems had to show a spine against this admin and now it's gone.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    The next "deal" will be struck in January when federal funding runs out, when we have another Democrat sworn into the house, when snap benefits are not at risk for another 8 months.

    I'm also disappointed in this, but its worth pointing out that they may be setting up for a later fight which doesn't come at the cost of starving our poorest citizens, which the trump administration has shown the nation they're gleeful to do.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I hope your right, I really do. It just seems like every time a fight has been lost, the answer is always "but next time" or "but next election".... Meanwhile look where we're at now. How many more next times do we have?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    In fairness, it was only 8 democrates. But yeah, I am not sure why the Republicans would give in in January if they wouldn't now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I wonder if Obamacare folks would've paid their first payment for 2025 by then? There may be value in letting folks see sticker shock, as it gives a clear "this is what we're fighting for" signal

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I didn't see anything about securing snap benefits or anything. Is that a side effect kind of thing?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The legislation includes a "minibus" of three full-year appropriations bills, including a full funding of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, benefits through the end of next September, and keeps much of the government open on a short-term basis through Jan. 30.

    But in a major concession for Democrats, the deal does not include an extension of enhanced subsidies under Obamacare, or the Affordable Care Act, after Republicans held firm against extending those funds beyond this year. That means more than 20 million Americans could see their premiums spike next year.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Hot dang, I read a cbs news article and it didn't mention that. I even went back to check. Isn't cbs under new ownership or something?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I mean they did get some things in other areas. The argument I am hearing is that the deal won't get better. And I find it hard to counter that myself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    What'd they get in other areas? I must have missed that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Their corporate overlords (amazon mostly I bet) were going to start losing money from the holiday air shipping and travel closures so they called up Schumer and told him to rap it up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Schumer voted no. I'm looking for real reasons that won't get me laughed out of the room for being uninformed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Schumer was in on it and voted no because he wanted the plausible deniability because he knows he's in hot water for all his previous collaborationist deals. The yes voters are loyal sacrificial patsies who (all but one I think) aren't up for reelection. It's backfired on him because one of the patsies chickened out while being grilled on camera and blabbed on him. That's the consensus.

    As to why now, yeah I'm pretty sure the air traffic closures were going to inconvenience their corporate donors.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›