Quo Vadis, Democrats?

[Zanza]

Trump said today:

"I thought would be met with fury on the left, but they're sort of giving up."..."I really thought that we were gonna have to sort of fight it through. There's been no fight."

[Tonitrus]

As I said, I am not unsympathetic to the messaging...but it should not be as simple as just being stick-in-the-muds. 

I doubt the Dem leadership wants the effects of a full shutdown either...and would need to be to work the situation in a way that is beneficial to them and (hopefully) the American people.  That could be holding out long enough that the GOP caves...or else be prepared to have the government shut down for 1.25 years. 

Ultimately, I expect the current GOP will just eventually "nuclear option" again...being that there are pretty much no rules any more...almost surprised they haven't suggested it already.

[Oexmelin]

The American "free press" seems to be exclusively owned by right-wing billionaires, so it may not reflect the full spectrum of opinions.

Regardless of the politics of the owners, a lot of journalists - and dems, who hail from the same circles - are really into the politics of respectability and responsibility. They will respect "political stewardship" before they respect any act of vague rebellion.

[grumbler]

Trump said today:

"I thought would be met with fury on the left, but they're sort of giving up."..."I really thought that we were gonna have to sort of fight it through. There's been no fight."

Trump is probably not your best source for news.

[garbon]

As I said, I am not unsympathetic to the messaging...but it should not be as simple as just being stick-in-the-muds. 

I doubt the Dem leadership wants the effects of a full shutdown either...and would need to be to work the situation in a way that is beneficial to them and (hopefully) the American people.  That could be holding out long enough that the GOP caves...or else be prepared to have the government shut down for 1.25 years. 

Ultimately, I expect the current GOP will just eventually "nuclear option" again...being that there are pretty much no rules any more...almost surprised they haven't suggested it already.

So what do you think Dem leadership should do?

[Sheilbh]

Regardless of the politics of the owners, a lot of journalists - and dems, who hail from the same circles - are really into the politics of respectability and responsibility. They will respect "political stewardship" before they respect any act of vague rebellion.

I remember reading somewhere that an extraordinary proportion of working American journalists are working for the NYT (something mad like 20%). It reflects the death of the press obviously.

But I also think it is important because I think it's possibly as important that the dominant voice of the American press is that "voice from nowhere". And I think a normalisation - which I don't think is necessarily in how they report Trump which is not normalising Trump - but a desperate almost psychological need to report everything else within "norms" and as if Trump is to some extent discrete from the rest of politics.

I think it's a bit like the woeful record political scientists have in explaining or predicting anything to do with Trump or MAGA - they deal with and their experience is about the average, the norm. I think in terms of academic commentators, historians and cultural theorists have been far better placed - possibly because they are thinking more around contingency and construction.

[Tonitrus]

As I said, I am not unsympathetic to the messaging...but it should not be as simple as just being stick-in-the-muds. 

I doubt the Dem leadership wants the effects of a full shutdown either...and would need to be to work the situation in a way that is beneficial to them and (hopefully) the American people.  That could be holding out long enough that the GOP caves...or else be prepared to have the government shut down for 1.25 years. 

Ultimately, I expect the current GOP will just eventually "nuclear option" again...being that there are pretty much no rules any more...almost surprised they haven't suggested it already.

So what do you think Dem leadership should do?

Great question...and I wish I had a good answer. 

The Dems are in a mostly ineffective minority under our system.  The difference with our system and say, the parliamentary one, is that they would be completely ineffective, but ours allow them this one, dangerous lever of power...which due to the quirky rules of the Senate, allow them to derail the government.  We all know this, as the tool has been used back-and-forth a few times in the last 30 years.  But, of course, it is a dangerous lever that has to be used carefully, and can easily work against one instead of helping one.

As a pure matter of principle, sure...shut it down.  But what is the exit strategy?  And again, while I sympathize with the simple sentiment of "not being complicit"...that strategy means "we get our demands, or it lasts forever"...or the GOP does the nuclear option.  So that means this is a political game of chicken...

GOP car: concede to the Democrat demands, or use the "nuclear option".
Dems car: concede, give up a few votes for cloture, and then all vote against the bill.

The Dems may get the satisfaction of forcing the GOP into using the nuclear option...but then they still lose, and the Senate concept of the filibuster is dead for good (and maybe it should be?).  That the GOP hasn't just said they'll go ahead do that strait away is interesting...and indicates they aren't too troubled by a shutdown...or hope they'll get more political mileage by forcing the Dems to cave.

Back to what the Dem leadership should do...I think my biggest personal problem might be their messaging.  They've wrapped it all up in demands over the extension of medical benefits.  A laudable goal...but I think has the double-edge of exposing themselves too much to blame for taking part in this political fight.  I think a better play might have been to just say "the administration sucks...the GOP has the majority in both houses, we're in the minority, we have no control...sucks that they cannot effectively wield power".  Put the burden on the GOP to try to justify themselves using obscure Senate rules as their excuse...I think it'd be much harder to explain/justify to voters.

But...I'm no political expert...that may not work either.

[jimmy olsen]

The Dems are absolutely terrible at messaging.

[Tonitrus]

The Dems are absolutely terrible at messaging.

I think there a few reasons for that...some their fault, some not.

- The Dems seem to keep sticking to traditional media messaging tactics...which no longer work.  Like trying to be the honorable, noble knight fighting an enemy with no honor, ethics or sense of fair play.
- They're in the minority everywhere...so media is less likely to give them much attention.
- Corporate media consolidation and its effects (as shown by recent settlements/surrenders) has shifted most of tone away from anything confrontational.

It's an almost amazing turnabout...I remember Obama and his campaign(s) being seen as at the forefront of new/modern media and internet messaging...now it's been completely flipped around. 

[crazy canuck]

I think showing right wing incompetence is a better way to win voters (or make the other side lose voters) than trying to show the merits of complex policy proposals.

It's cute that you still think American elections are one and lost based on who is competent

Well, obviously Americans do not vote for competence, see last election. But showing that Trump cannot reign in his own party would damage him more than any policy proposals or even real legislative achievements could.

But so long as he has the fascists at his back, that's not a winning strategy.

[Oexmelin]

In any case, I fear this is moot. Enough Democrats will flip for the GOP bill to pass.

[The Minsky Moment]

I do think it's hard to mobilize effort for a budget fight when we have an executive branch that acts in a way that makes the budgeting process virtually meaningless. Trump just cuts whatever he wants to cut, moves money to wherever we wants it, and the Speaker just nods and smiles his idiot smile.  The district courts dutifully review the record, find the executive action illegal and block it.  Only to have their legs cut off a few days letter when the Supreme Court issues a one-line stay of the order, effectively deciding the case by making any future relief ineffective.

So shut down the government, don't shut it down - makes no difference.  The King exercises his prerogative and no one will stand up to stop it.

[garbon]

Great question...and I wish I had a good answer. 

The Dems are in a mostly ineffective minority under our system.  The difference with our system and say, the parliamentary one, is that they would be completely ineffective, but ours allow them this one, dangerous lever of power...which due to the quirky rules of the Senate, allow them to derail the government.  We all know this, as the tool has been used back-and-forth a few times in the last 30 years.  But, of course, it is a dangerous lever that has to be used carefully, and can easily work against one instead of helping one.

As a pure matter of principle, sure...shut it down.  But what is the exit strategy?  And again, while I sympathize with the simple sentiment of "not being complicit"...that strategy means "we get our demands, or it lasts forever"...or the GOP does the nuclear option.  So that means this is a political game of chicken...

GOP car: concede to the Democrat demands, or use the "nuclear option".
Dems car: concede, give up a few votes for cloture, and then all vote against the bill.

The Dems may get the satisfaction of forcing the GOP into using the nuclear option...but then they still lose, and the Senate concept of the filibuster is dead for good (and maybe it should be?).  That the GOP hasn't just said they'll go ahead do that strait away is interesting...and indicates they aren't too troubled by a shutdown...or hope they'll get more political mileage by forcing the Dems to cave.

Yes, it is of course a move that should not be taken lightly. And thankfully that's why it has been sometime since we had a government shutdown.

But I also wonder if part of it is the unfortunate habit we know have of how we frame things in our system. I'd suggest another take could be, we have a system where to keep the government funded, bipartisan report is needed. In order to ensure support from across the aisle, a little has to be given to get the opposition to get them to support that legislation.

If the party with the majority decides that is irrelevant (and their head, Trump, says fuck the Dems, give them nothing), then it isn't honest to say the Dems are taking the government hostage and forced the shutdown. Not that you are saying that but that is Republican rhetoric now that the shutdown has occured.

Back to what the Dem leadership should do...I think my biggest personal problem might be their messaging.  They've wrapped it all up in demands over the extension of medical benefits.  A laudable goal...but I think has the double-edge of exposing themselves too much to blame for taking part in this political fight.  I think a better play might have been to just say "the administration sucks...the GOP has the majority in both houses, we're in the minority, we have no control...sucks that they cannot effectively wield power".  Put the burden on the GOP to try to justify themselves using obscure Senate rules as their excuse...I think it'd be much harder to explain/justify to voters.

But...I'm no political expert...that may not work either.

I feel like that argument would only work among people who are already leaning democrat/or away from the current administration. It is broad and unfocused as opposed to what they've attempted about how they are fighting for a specific right for Americans that the Republicans have denied them and are continuing to deny them. With I guess the idea that as Americans experience more and more issues with their health, it'll be clear who is to blame for their health woes.

I'm not saying their strategy will necessarily work but it at least has something relevant to say to those who don't yet see the current administration as the problem.

[crazy canuck]

I do think it's hard to mobilize effort for a budget fight when we have an executive branch that acts in a way that makes the budgeting process virtually meaningless. Trump just cuts whatever he wants to cut, moves money to wherever we wants it, and the Speaker just nods and smiles his idiot smile.  The district courts dutifully review the record, find the executive action illegal and block it.  Only to have their legs cut off a few days letter when the Supreme Court issues a one-line stay of the order, effectively deciding the case by making any future relief ineffective.

So shut down the government, don't shut it down - makes no difference.  The King exercises his prerogative and no one will stand up to stop it.

I think that is a good reason not to play along with the farce.

[Razgovory]

The Dems are absolutely terrible at messaging.

This is true, but it is a symptom of their problem, not the cause.