145 Comments
User's avatar
Hilary Lambert's avatar

Thanks for this. It is very bad. I do like your good news - that this terrible event is a dividing line between old and young Dems. Hope you are right about that. I am 73 and am so tired of us Boomers struggling and failing to keep up with the emerging future. C'mon youth!

Expand full comment
Diana E's avatar

What do you mean “us” boomers? This Boomer hasn’t stopped fighting since the Civil Rights movement for equality and fair treatment be it race, gender, class or disability. And I know plenty of Boomers like me. Our job is to provide support and advice from our experiences and mistakes, not just “retire” from the fight.

Expand full comment
Hilary Lambert's avatar

I am referring to the Boomer-heavy elected leadership that is clueless and needs to get out of the way.

Expand full comment
mary thiel's avatar

As a boomer, until recently, I’ve been tired of the younger generation drifting to the trump side, until now. I hope they maintain their pivot to something more progressive, and keep the momentum going.

Expand full comment
Hilary Lambert's avatar

I sure hope so.

Expand full comment
MGL 929's avatar

Been to every protest here in MI. Not ever 1 person under 50 in sight. Yes, it’s us boomers carrying the fight forward.

Expand full comment
Hilary Lambert's avatar

Yes, it was us Boomers who got fracking banned in NYS in 2014. I know what you mean. But there's leadership Boomers at the top who need to step down and get out of the way.

Expand full comment
Diana E's avatar

Generalizations aren’t useful. Be specific about who needs to step down. Pelosi already passed the torch to Jeffries and won’t seek re-election. Are you in fact including members of the Silent generation as well, they are next after Boomers.

Expand full comment
Hilary Lambert's avatar

Calm down. Is this a course examination or a conversation? Sheesh. Best wishes.

Expand full comment
Diana E's avatar

I asked you to be specific. If you are unable or unwilling to respond to an legitimate question to understand your position and suggestion (who and for what reason) rather than a general “throw the bums out,” it isn’t a conversation. If you just want to express frustration, that’s legitimate. But, i want to understand where to focus actions to fux the problem.

Expand full comment
Hilary Lambert's avatar

Thanks!

Expand full comment
Suzyq660's avatar

I don't think we can call John Manchin Fetterman a boomer.

Expand full comment
Virginia Witmer's avatar

If you think the “Shutdown Deal sucks,” imagine yourself a SNAP recipient, making $15 an hour choosing between food and rent. I had a friend for whom

I did the math. We weren’t even thinking of health care at the time. It may give you a different perspective. Trump IS trying to starve the poor, so the 1939 FDR Depression law that was the origin of SNAP must be restored.

Expand full comment
Miles Speigle's avatar

It does suck. However, Dems care more about their constituents than the GOP do. The bill has a 5 step process so I am told which at any point along the way, the fence jumpers can change their votes. We really need to have Adelitta sworn in which, they'll have do upon reopening. We still have momentum....

Expand full comment
Virginia Witmer's avatar

Agreed on all counts. We can only push our reps the minute they are back. I noticed Johnson didn’t mention the swearing in this morning. Gotta happen!

Expand full comment
James's avatar

Johnson will do precisely what Fat Donny tells him to do, whether it’s legal or not. And since we have just gotten a(nother) demonstration that NOBODY is going to challenge him, he feels — and not unjustifiably so — that he can do whatever he wants and dare you to stop him. And surrendering isn’t going to bring back the $330 billion they slashed from SNAP, or the TRILLION they slashed from Medicaid, so guess what? Ben Franklin said that “Those who would surrender essential freedoms for the promises of some temporary security deserve neither”. This isn’t the exact use case he was talking about, but the promises are every bit as empty as the soul of this "president".

Expand full comment
Virginia Witmer's avatar

The vote of last Tuesday has rocked Donny a bit. Also some House Republicans want to keep their seats in ‘26 and know they are on shaky ground after last Tuesday.

The Democratic governors are doing a good job of Donny Watch as are the courts and voters who protest constantly in person, with phone calls, or in writing. This 91-year old writes a minimum of 10 GOTV postcards a day and frequently sees the results. There seems always to be an election somewhere in some state to send postcards to voters. Some are small—mayor of Mobile,AL, but all are building blocks to a Dem win of the House and Senate in ‘26. Check on TonyTheDemocrat, who gives biographies, detailed instructions, and addresses.

Expand full comment
Edie Sadowski's avatar

Agree totally! GET ADELITA SWORN IN!

Expand full comment
Suzyq660's avatar

I doubt that we are going to stop Project 2025 without some pain. Democrats are fighting the people with all the money. Tesla just promise Musk $100 billion a year! That is ludicrous, but this kind of blatant greed for money and power are what we are fighting against.

Expand full comment
Becky Wieser's avatar

The 1939 law didn't go anywhere near far enough at the time and had to be improved, but I agree that food stamp laws must be restored and also more protections must be put in place so those laws can't just collapse like has happened recently and so that well-fed, well-paid politicians can't use an essential program like that to hold millions of people hostage just to get some kind of luxuries they don't even need!

Expand full comment
angryoleman's avatar

What is it? $6.81 a day?

Expand full comment
Virginia Witmer's avatar

If you mean SNAP food allowance, I think it varies.

Expand full comment
Jacques Robinson's avatar

The first thing I did this morning was cancel my monthly donations to the DSCC. That money can be better spent on individuals rather than this messed up caucus.

Expand full comment
Diana E's avatar

I stopped in January. The only $ goes to my Representative who fights and uses any extra funds to support other Reps like her in less secure districts (something she has been very clear about to her donors).

Expand full comment
Diana E's avatar

FYI, I just got her public response to the 8. Essentially, hell no if there is no guarantee for continuing the health care subsidies.

Expand full comment
James's avatar

I quit with *any* D--- organizations in 2014 (including the party itself). I back candidates, not parties. Always did, even when I was registered as a Dem. But that came to a screeching halt in the Wasserman-Schulz era, and only the names have changed in any noticeable fashion. They're just as feckless now as they were then, with a few notable exceptions. Too few.

Expand full comment
Edie Sadowski's avatar

So did I! I give to Progressive Democrats of America! Look them up.

Expand full comment
Larry Rafey's avatar

Same Here ! ! ! ! My family is debating sitting out the midterms since voting does not seem to matter.

Expand full comment
mary thiel's avatar

That is a gift to the trump regime that they dream about.

Expand full comment
Evelyn Chiland's avatar

Doing nothing accomplishes that. Nothing! When good systems fail, one has to work to get them back in control. (and improved) Doing nothing is a cop out! Much of doing nothing, (not voting, not self educating, ) has produced what we have now. We have to do whatever it takes and work with many others! work!!

Expand full comment
Edie Sadowski's avatar

Sitting it out got us the Orange Blob!

Expand full comment
Barbara Dillard's avatar

I agree with you what if a lot of us thought that way then we’ll be in this mess longer. We need to vote in the midterms.

Expand full comment
Larry Rafey's avatar

We're debating that and I have always believed that (and I'm 83 and lots of elections behind me) ... but this action might finally turn that belief on its head as my family members have been advising me for years.

But ... let's see how things evolve. Voting and voting and voting and having nothing to show for it except punishment .... ??? And it's easy to make excuses for it as we our "leaders" have validated what people have been saying for the past quarter century ... that the Dem Party won't deliver ... ever ... so long as corporate donors are the better choice for them.

Expand full comment
Diana E's avatar

Voting got us FDR and all of the entitlements you and I rely on—Social Security and Medicare. It got us Marriage Equality, the Americans With Disabilities Act, Obamacare, the Civil Rights Act, shall I go on?

Expand full comment
Larry Rafey's avatar

Totally agree .... back when votes counted for something and we didn't face the likes of traitors in the pack. The well orchestrated "caves" of the Pelosi/Harry Reid camp got us where we are now ... and it some have failed to learn a thing from it so long as they can fill their pockets with corporate funds before retiring.

But I decided I shall vote, at my advanced age might well be my last, but I am beginning to hear the wind from a lot of younger folks who have had enough. In any case, my money is now going to support some of the substacks and indi-news orgs that are popping up and no longer doling out to the DNC.

Expand full comment
Diana E's avatar

I’m doing the same, supporting papers like AP and Reuters, and substacks. We’ll see how this plays out, and it is difficult to watch my neighbors struggle for food and healthcare—my money is going to food banks and well rated non profits directly serving people in need. At least my Representative is a fierce fighter (I do support her because she intentionally shares any excess she can to those in less safe districts who are trying to fight Trump and his minions).

Expand full comment
Becky Wieser's avatar

"Voting and voting and voting and nothing to show for it" is because OTHER PEOPLE didn't vote! If enough people had voted, there WOULD be something to show for it! The LAST thing we need is MORE people like you refusing to vote! Voting is an essential right, & if you don't USE it you will LOSE IT! As will the rest of us voters, just because others didn't even try! I am tired of excuses like that, that aren't even logical in nature. Or are you trying to discourage other voters as well, maybe? 🤔

Expand full comment
angryoleman's avatar

It matters only if enough are like minded to participate

Expand full comment
rlritt's avatar

The point if this bill is two fold. 1) it releases SNAP funds. 2) the ACA automatically expires on Dec. 31st. This bill requires a vote to expire the ACA.

Expand full comment
Becky Wieser's avatar

It matters A LOT when you FAIL to vote AGAINST the worst case scenario! That's how fat Donny won!

Expand full comment
Larry Rafey's avatar

I agree. I shall vote. What is there to lose?

Expand full comment
Becky Wieser's avatar

What is there to lose? If you vote, nothing. If you DON'T vote, possibly everything!

Expand full comment
Barbara Dillard's avatar

Really sitting out the midterms – we need to vote then that doesn’t make sense to me

Expand full comment
rlritt's avatar

The idea behind this vote is that as Dec 31st, the ACA automatically expires. This bill forces senators to go on record to get rid of the ACA.

Expand full comment
Alyssa Wostrel's avatar

Bless you for your post this morning. It resonated with me and gave me hope and fortitude and a way forward with the frustration and anger. Rebuilding is where Dems need to focus, I agree. Not a reset. And I especially liked the last sentence of your post :)

thank you Mike 👍💪

Expand full comment
George Fergus's avatar

40 days of suffering -- for NOTHING.

That's the gift these quislings have given the Republicans to run on.

Expand full comment
MGL 929's avatar

God forbid senate and congress should endure delayed or cancelled flights during holiday season. It’s really that simple.

Expand full comment
Karen Mohr's avatar

The other good news is that the cr provides funding only through January, at which time (and after the busy holiday travel season), we can look forward to another shutdown. At that point, Republicans will have certainly betrayed their promise to address the ACA subsidies, people will actually be paying the higher premiums or going without health insurance, and we can more convincingly - and closer to the midterms - pin the blame and the pain on the GOP. Let’s all take a breath. This is just a chapter, not the whole story.

Expand full comment
Kelly A's avatar

Yes - the rest of the world must think we are pathetic pieces of crap right now — starving people, taking away their healthcare, laying off Fed employees, over the holidays. Scrooge-like. What a horrid mess!

Expand full comment
James's avatar

You can (and we should) pin the blame to the livers of the GOP, but the pain? That’s non-partisan and it won’t be felt by the ones with $175K jobs (plus free stock tips) in Congress. When they decided that THIS TIME FOR SURE Lucy wasn’t gonna yank away the football, we ALL landed flat on our backs with the wind knocked out of us.

The only thing that might come out of this is the grim satisfaction of knowing that Walmart’s probably gonna have a terrible Black Friday.

Expand full comment
angryoleman's avatar

Maybe

Expand full comment
David Levy's avatar

Can’t say I see any good news here and can’t see how we’re really any better off than if the shutdown had never happened. What, a pinky promise for a plan for an outline of a vote? That’s what we got from the longest shutdown in history ? It’s way over time of completely new leadership in the Democratic Party.

Expand full comment
carolyn semiglasow's avatar

Thanks Mike. Trump and the Republicans are cruel...it is on full display. They can't erect an East Wing demolition wall to block this out. Even MAGA felt this. As long as the rest of us keep protesting and fighting we will prevail. POWER TO THE PEOPLE.

Expand full comment
Steven Jonas's avatar

I don't think that the Shutdown will be ending anytime soon. That would require a corresponding vote in the House, which would require a reopening of the House, which would mean that Johnson would have to swear in Ms. Grijalva, which would likely (although not certainly) lead to a House vote on the resolution to force the release of The Epstein Files, which is the very last thing on Earth that Trump wants. And Johnson does precisely what Trump wants.

Expand full comment
Diana E's avatar

Johnson’s god is Donald Trump. He’s a devout Christian like Herod was a devout Jew.

Expand full comment
James's avatar

You’re right in that Johnson will do exactly as he’s told by his Lord and Master, but even if he swears in Adelita Grijalva, and she is the 218th signature on the discharge petition (which she will be) all that does is force a floor vote in the House to release the Kraken. It still has to clear the Senate — with its de facto 60-vote threshold, and assuming that happens, Fat Donny can simply veto the bill. The act that we’re even having this fight suggests that the Epstein thing is more distraction than anythign of actual substance, but it is a pain point for him, which in itself makes it worth pursuing.

Expand full comment
Steven Jonas's avatar

Fully agree (on all points), but Johnson is surely hoping not to be put on the Epstein Files spot. And yes, Trump would certainly veto any bill on this one, but even he surely would not want to have to do that.

Expand full comment
Jeff Friedman's avatar

This is just a vote to have a debate on the legislation. If public pressure can turn just one Dem (or maybe even a slightly more reasonable Repub (Collins? Murkowski?-is there one?), the legislation will fail-as it will have only 59 votes. And if it passes the Senate, just 3 Repub defections in the House would sink it-Thomas Massie, for one, is always a possibility for an anti-Trump, party-bucking vote. And then there are the vulnerable repubs in swing districts. So don’t panic yet, or let your anger overtake you. Instead, flood the offices of the 8 turncoats (and if your Senator is a republican) with phone calls and e-mails demanding that they vote against the bill unless extension of healthcare subsidies are in there, in some form. Remember-we just need one Senator (especially one of the 8) to change their yes to a no.

Expand full comment
James's avatar

No, this was a vote to END debate on the legislation (a cloture vote). Actually PASSING the legislation only requires a simple majority once debate has concluded and the measure is put to a vote of the full Senate. This is why budget bills can be passed “in reconciliation” — because they don’t require a cloture vote as long as the bill sent from the House isn’t amended.

The filibuster actually began with senators (one or more) actually speaking in front of the body to extend “debate”, though there was no requirement that what they spoke about be related to the legislation at hand. The point was to “talk the bill to death”, and all that was required was to hold the floor until (a) you ran out of things to say or (b) a 3/5 majority got sick enough of listening to you that they voted to shut you up. In that era (which was not all that long ago, relatively speaking — no pun intended) filibusters weren’t automatic, and were really only used if you were Storm Thurmond absolutely dead set on killing civil rights legislation. (Thurmond holds the record for longest talking filibuster at, I think 25 hours and change?)

More recently, a filibuster by the minority party is just assumed, which is where the idea of a 60-vote threshold coms from. But the filibuster has no basis in law. It’s simply a rule of the Senate that says cloture requires a 3/5 majority vote. And it can — and in limited cases HAS — be repealed by (ironically) a simple majority. Harry Reid did away with the filibuster for non-SCOTUS confirmation votes because MitchMcConnell was stonewalling every Obama appointee to come into the Senate. Mitch McConnell extended that to include SCOTUS confirmations when he needed to jam three partisan hacks through confirmation before election day. But nobody — so far — was willing to resort to the nuclear option” on legislation — and they still aren’t. Apparenlty not even Fat Donny Two-Times can convince them of that one.

But with the cloture vote won, it will only require 51 votes to pass the budget bill. At which point everyone — E-V-E-R-Y-ONE — who isn’t rich is, putting it plainly— fucked.

Expand full comment
Larry Rafey's avatar

You Said It! This was the final betrayal !

Expand full comment
Kelly A's avatar

Yes Mike — ALL of the above!!! My first thought after the disgust and anger was that this can lead to the end of the old guard and open doors for the younger, more progressive-thinking candidates. We have to keep hope alive.

Expand full comment
RP2112's avatar

Great post, Mike. Much needed. Thank you. Mikie Sherrill also dropped a great statement (text only-- don't know if she made a corresponding IG or TikTok) opposing the deal. It's a great read.

As you pointed out-- R's have the ultimate "advantage" in these scenarios-- they simply don't care one iota about the people they claim to represent.

Expand full comment
Carl Selfe's avatar

I am not happy about the deal. And other things. I cannot bring myself into affinity with farmers. They voted for Trump. No doubt farmers would be a lot smarter had they gone to Trump University. Let farmers eat soybeans. Soybeans are a great source of protein.

“All of us who are dismayed by the present state of the union, this is no time to give up,” Biden declared. “It’s time to get up. Get up now, get up.”

If you have become overwhelmed, rely on my 2 buckets to sanity. 2 buckets says stay in the fight. We are winning with a year to midterms. If you stay in, we will shut them down.

https://hotbuttons.substack.com/p/too-much-two-buckets-to-sanity?r=3m1bs

Expand full comment
Murray Smart's avatar

8 DACO's - Democrats ALWAYS Chicken Out!!!! Pretty hard to defend your own goal when you have 8 players who actively work to help the other side score on you (who are also hurting their own constituents and they don't care about them either). Lesson to Trump and Republicans: Do whatever the hell you want, Do not ever give in to Democrats, Eventually some Democrats will DACO and you can move on with your agenda!

Expand full comment
LIz Menges's avatar

I have a contrarian opinion: maybe the Democrats calculate that when the average person sees this shut down drag on, flights cancelled for Thanksgiving, starving children etc., they'll blame ALL of congress and not just the R's. Maybe they calculate that it's BECAUSE OF the success of the D's on election day that the tide is turning and that Trump may not be as intimidating to the R party and finally there can be some bipartisanship. If they're wrong and the R's renege again, then all bets are off. Thoughts?

Expand full comment
James's avatar

"If" the R's renege again? That's almost guaranteed (or your money back). To paraphrase Churchill, "You can always count on Republican to do the right thing... after they have exhausted all other options." And they were SO close to being out of options -- you could tell because they were doubling down on a pair of treys. Dems were holding the better hand, and you only needed to rewind a week to see abundant evidence of this. Rewind a few more weeks and the largest single protest of its kind EVER unfolded in over 2600 towns and cities across the country (and beyond). This sellout is a slap in the face to everybody who marched, everybody who wrote letters, signed petitions got pepper sprayed and beaten and voted for Democrats up and down the ballot all across the country in the biggest electoral rout I can remember since at least 2006. And this is how Dem "leadership" responds to that? Are you FUCKING KIDDING ME?

You can't blame a Republican for being a Republican any more than you can blame a dog for being a dog. But you would think that the fossils in the Democratic caucus would have seen enough of this to know that you cannot trust these guys to negotiate in good faith. That MIGHT have been the case at one time but it was before I was old enough to vote (and that is more time than I like to think about).

Expand full comment
Amy J's avatar

I did think of this. I was hoping since they know more about this process than I do that maybe they were trying to show the voters of both parties who is trying to help them. I’m tired of this for sure. Why is MAGA so awful

Expand full comment
WiseAssumer in Las Cruces's avatar

The best possible outcome is MAGA might have to vote on the Epstein files--if Squeaker Mike, Thune and Bone Spurs haven't figured a way around it.

Expand full comment
James's avatar

They'll have ot vote on it. The discharge petition will see that it gets to the floor of the House, but that's all it will do. It could die in the House, die in the Senate or get vetoed by Fat Donny himself if it ever gets out of Congress. But there will be a record of who voted which way, and if it comes to a veto, well... we all know who did THAT. But if you're expecting a Big Reveal™, I thin you're gonna be disappointed. A thousand FBI agents have worked overtime to go through and catalog every mention of His Orangeness in that evidence, and if anything is actually released, it'll be cherry picked. Only hope there is of seeing the unrelated version is if some foreign power has copies of the source material. And is willing to provide it. And even then MAGA will stick their fingers in their ears and sing "LA-lalalala-LALALALA-LALALALA-LALALALA-LAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!" until we're all out of breath.

Expand full comment