So only these 10 people were right?

[angrychair]

So Adam Schiff was wrong? Bernie Sanders was wrong? Cory Booker was wrong? Elizabeth Warren was wrong? Every single Democrat in the House was wrong?
MediasTouch are wrong? Lincoln Project are wrong?
Every single pro-democracy organization in the country was wrong? All the large federal employees unions were wrong?
Almost every pro-democracy intellectual was wrong?

Either everyone else is wrong and only these 10 people are right. There is no third option.

I fail to understand how so many are willing to believe these 10 people were right and literally some of the most respected people and pro-democracy organizations in the country were all wrong absolutely baffles me.

[Think. Again.]

1. No, they were extremely wrong.

[angrychair]

3. Sorry that's a little ambiguous

Who was wrong?

[Think. Again.]

11. Sorry, it was a reply to the question asked in the title.

In my opinion, the 10 Dems who voted in support of an unconstitutional CR, either for cloture or for the unconstitutional bill itself, were extremely wrong.

[LiberalArkie]

36. Could the 10 be considered the "conservative wing" of the Democratic Party?

Just asking.

[Wiz Imp]

37. No

[LiberalArkie]

74. Thank you. I do not have the patience to look through their voting records.

I know it is easy to be classified as "Liberal" for for voting for womens rights, gay rights, some ecology but also be for the wealthy at the expense of the poor.

I still look at the Conservatives as how they were here in Arkansas under Faubus, not just the segregation things but general life in a class based society.

[Bluetus]

45. Just for the record, King is not a Democrat

But I guess it doesn't matter. Being a Democrat apparently means that it is OK for one to override the majority 9-38. Might as well not have a party at all.

[Think. Again.]

49. Sound like a wing we don't need...

...let's just amputate it.

[mr715]

60. While

I often agree with you, I do not believe "amputation" is warranted.

Lets do some physical therapy first.

But yes, I share your anger and frustration.

[Think. Again.]

66. We really don't have the time for that...

...let's shed the weights that are keeping us back and get on with whatever must be done.

[PatSeg]

98. Yes, I agree

We've been through situations like this before. It rarely justifies throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but I think more pressure on our Democratic representatives is definitely warranted. Meanwhile, I do believe Democrats may need new leadership in the senate.

I listened to Chuck Schumer and I really tried to see his point of view, but the scores of other Democrats in opposition made much better arguments. The republican bullying and gaslighting is really getting old already.

[CrispyQ]

103. I vote for Chris Murphy.

He's been very outspoken throughout Trump's first term & the campaign & since Trump took office. I've always liked Chris since I read he used to hop on the bus & take a ride & talk to his constituents. They loved it.

[PatSeg]

105. Yes, Chris Murphy would be an excellent choice

I think he is far more in touch with real people than Senator Schumer these days.

[RiverStone]

97. They could be the 10 who speed up the end of democracy

Nuff said.

[claudette]

2. Baffles me too

I will not accept the reasoning of only 10 people over the opposite reasoning of so many others. How did those 9 feel about voting the same as Fetterman?

[Whyisthisstillclose]

4. Good question! This was s horrible precedent.

[brush]

5. What's yourpoint? Right or wrong about what?

[angrychair]

9. I made it clear

Either all these people were wrong about just forcing a shutdown or only these 10 senators were right.
I believe those 10 senators were very wrong and have empowered a dictator with unquestionable authority. It was not by accident that on the same day the Republican CR passed that TSF gave that unhinged "arrest my political enemies" speech at justice.
The passage of that CR gave him all the leverage he needed to take the mask all the way off and not even pretend anymore.

[brush]

13. "...about just forcing a shutdown..." is what wasn't clear in your OP.

Now I get what you were getting at.

[KT2000]

6. Did Schumer orchestrate the ten

to prevent a shut-down and allow the rest to stand on principle? or was this what all the senators believed?

[Bluetus]

52. That is a good question

And looky here ... here are the courageous ones who voted AGAINST the CR AFTER refusing to support the filibuster. That is hypocritical to the max.

King and Shaheen voted in favor of the bill after crushing the filibuster. That's consistent. Stupid, but consistent.

Durbin, Cortez Masto, Fetterman, Gillibrand, Hassan, Peters, Schatz and Schumer all voted to kill the filibuster, but then voted against the CR. That's evil bullshit right there. If you are going to screw every American, at least have the courage to do it on the actual bill rather than hiding behind a procedural vote.

And what's this bullshit we heard from the newest Manchin-grade asshole, Fetterman? Didn't he say he would never, ever vote for a shutdown. But that is exactly how he voted. Lying SOB. I am so sorry I ever supported his lousy ass.

[SuzannaD]

101. Durbin is in an EXTREMELY Safe seat.

Illinois is very democratic. Our governor is standing up to Rump. So it's not the demographics that is behind this. He's 80 years old, and needs to be put out to pasture. I sent him an email stating that he should be ashamed, and he should resign right now. Let someone else fill his seat until 2028 election.

[ProfessorGAC]

106. Good For You

I'll send him an email too.
I'll express a very similar sentiment to yours.
He seems to be playing the 2010 playbook.
No longer viable, and neither is he.

[Bluetus]

107. Absolutely. But it is absolutely insulting for this safe seat guy

to KILL the filibuster, and then turn around and vote AGAINST the bill.

That is outrageous, and this just shows how ineffective this party has become.

This is such an egregious thing they did, all 7 who voted to kill the filibuster and then voted against the bill, must be forced out, one way or the other.

[pattyloutwo]

102. That was my thought...

Many are in liberal states, safe seats. I think the fear was in the Pres declaring national emergency and martial law

[Emile]

7. Trump and little Mikey Johnson thinks so. Trump

has been boasting about his huge mandate again.

It appears people who are saying these 10 democrats did the right thing are using a right-wing talking point.

[Wiz Imp]

38. Trump hasn't stopped boasting about the mandate since November

[ibegurpard]

8. Yeah it's obnoxious

There's a full-court press right now to try to change the narrative.

[William769]

10. You & me both brother.

[Srkdqltr]

12. We don't know, and won't probably ever know, who was right or wrong.

This all will take time to play out. You guys are jumping the gun here.

[druidity33]

14. A crap choice either way...

both of which won't be fully realized immediately. The shutdown consequences would have been quicker and more severe. The question from Schumer that sealed it for me was...

"Where is the off-ramp?"

Once the gov't is shut down... who turns it back on again? And who decides what an essential service is?

[Think. Again.]

51. You're ignoring the major done to the Democratic Party...

...by having some Democrats vote in favor of over-riding the Constitution.

[CrispyQ]

104. And bringing bills to the floor that dems had no hand in writing.

Trump's never giving that impound power back & Schumer's never going to win back the trust of the House dems. Talk about dividing the party.

[Tansy_Gold]

69. Shutting it down would have had other consequences . . . .

. . . . that would have made (eventually) turning it back on imperative.

Shutting down the government means shutting down the federal govt, but it does NOT mean shutting down the state governments. Though a federal govt shutdown might have been advantageous for some of 💩's nefarious plans, it would also have forced the states to step in. That's the one thing 💩 doesn't want -- the (more powerful) states becoming even more powerful.

But I say that from a very biased standpoint. More and more and more -- see David Gerrold's post on FB if you haven't already -- people are talking about the very real possibility of civil war. There are (somewhat facetious) memes asking Canada to adopt/annex the US, others showing the US split between Mexico and Canada. Underlying this, of course, is the notion -- the fear, if you will -- that the nation conceived in liberty in 1776 and preserved at great cost in human suffering in 1865 cannot, in fact, endure much longer. That instead of the single legal issue of chattel slavery dividing the country geographically, all the other economic issues that stemmed from that ideological basis divide us now literally within our neighborhoods, within our schools, within our workplaces. Within our online forums.

I think the most telling part of Gerrold's post was this:

There is a story about a scientist who was enlisted to debate a preacher about life on Earth. The scientist said, "If you can present compelling evidence, I am willing to change my views." He then asked the preacher, "If I can present compelling evidence, are you willing to change your views." The preacher said, "No, I am not." The scientist then said, "Then we cannot have a debate, not even a discussion."

And that is the ultimate divide between us.

MAGAts are the believers who are unwilling -- perhaps unable, but definitely unwilling -- to change their views in the face of any evidence.

What we the people of the US have been stripped of is any and all protection from predation by the powerful forces aligned against us, against our Constitution. The 2017-2021 regime sealed the Supreme Court, and thereby ALL the federal courts against us. Even if by some chance a SCOTUS justice rules against the current regime, there is no mechanism to prevent 💩 and/or 🍉 replacing that justice or simply not obeying the ruling, because there is no body to enforce it. We listen to the encouraging voices of the liberal YouTubers, but we have no institutions we can reliably turn to in the event of mass arrests of dissidents, of people of color, of intellectuals, of LGBTQIA+.

And yet we continue to protect and defend those institutions even when they have proven they will not -- and perhaps cannot -- protect and defend us.

The sanctity of The Union -- like the sanctity of a marriage -- is only as valid as the willingness of the constituents to maintain it. it's been said before, and by better economists, historians, political scientists than I, that maybe it's time for a national divorce. Whether it will be amicable or acrimonious remains to be seen. I live in a somewhat purple state, but in a very very red area of it, so I'm not speaking from a position of comfort with this idea of separation. But frankly, I don't see that either option presented to the Democratic senators was fully viable unless they were willing to consider changing their views on the continued viability of The Union at this point.

The sovereignty of the states is already being challenged; the sovereignty of private institutions is under assault. The assets of non-profit organizations are being frozen and one should not assume the courts will unfreeze those assets nor that those assets cannot be simply appropriated by a government agency.

We need, I think, to lose our unshakeable trust in the institutions. We need to turn off the magical thinking that this is all somehow going to go away with the 2026 midterms. Maybe, just maybe, we need to stop fighting over whether those 10 senators were right or wrong, and start considering that maybe the whole system is wrong and has been for a very long time. Maybe, just maybe, we need to think about why we see Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as our champions and potential leaders.

I caught hell here back in 2008 when I voiced my displeasure over Obama's financial transition team. I believed then, and I have never changed my belief, that he was preserving a very dangerous status quo. I railed against the Democrats' seeming inability, even when they had a super-majority in the Senate, to take advantage of that opportunity. The institutions, the protocols, the norms had to be preserved at all costs . . . and it now seems that protecting the institutions has cost us the institutions and the country.

What if anything, or who if anyone, will save us? Nothing and no one if we aren't willing to do it ourselves.

[Amaryllis]

86. "Shutting it down would have had other consequences . . . . . that would have made (eventually) turning it back on

imperative...:"
please say more about this. Would those who want to destroy it have any incentive to turn it back on? OMB, Voight, etc.

[Tansy_Gold]

96. Well, for one thing

they'd have to turn at least part of it back on if they want to use the military. But yes, their ultimate goal is to destroy everything. And there's little enough any of us can do about it if our senators won't fight for us.

I think the idea that Jeffries and Pelosi were behind letting GOP own the shutdown speaks volumes, as well as 💩 then thanking Schumer.

[Amaryllis]

84. That was what sealed it for me too - where is the off-ramp? ANd who turns it back on? and do they have any incentive to

turn it back on again if their goal is to destroy govt? THis is what makes it different this time from any other shutdown.

[angrychair]

15. Sorry, no, that's my point

The argument you are making is that those 10 people could be right while literally hundreds of some of the most respected Democrats and pro-democracy intellectuals in the country were wrong, just isn't logical or realistic.
Those 10 people decided to go against the will of the majority. That their opinion mattered more than the majority. That isn't how democracy works. That's how dictatorships work.

What they decided lead directly to this and this is only the beginning: https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143418756

[Wiz Imp]

31. Very flawed logic. The overwhelming majority is not always right.

In 2003, almost the entire Congress and the vast majority of the general public were in favor of invading Iraq. Those of us who were against it were sure it was a really bad idea. Who ended up being right? The overwhelming majority or the very small minority?

[DENVERPOPS]

46. I gotta tell you

if the Dems had had the balls to challenge the 2000 election, we wouldn't have ever been in that mess...............The same could have been said for challenging the 1980 election, the 2004 election and most certainly the 2016 election............

[Wiz Imp]

59. Um, they did challenge the 2000 election and the Supreme Court ruled against them

Once that happened, there was no way the result was going to change. As for challenging those other elections, if you really think there was any chance of those being overturned, well then...you're entitled to your opinion but the chances of any of those elections being overturned was no better than 1 Trillion to 1. It was never going to happen.

[yellow dahlia]

67. Um - and the 2024 election. n/t

[angrychair]

48. That is a logical fallacy

The exception to the rule doesn't make the rule wrong. It just means every rule has its outliers.

Never going to convince me that everyone was wrong and only these 10 people were right.

[Wiz Imp]

58. It just means every rule has its outliers.

And this could be one of those outliers. Just because you can't be convinced you are wrong doesn't mean you still can't be wrong.

[MichMan]

79. How is it not democracy ?

Those 10 duly elected Senators voted individually based on what they felt was good for their constituents. A dictatorship would have one person making the decision with no dissent permitted.

Wonder how many who voted against cloture this time were in favor of abolishing the filibuster completely last year ?

[Alpeduez21]

39. Agreeing with totalitarian dic-fucking-tators is the WRONG FUCKING CHOICE

I’m sorry I don’t seem to have the intellectual detachment required to allow fascists to do whatever they want. It’s going to take some pretty convincing arguments more than ‘well, let’s just wait and see’. If we will probably never know how can one be so sure that ‘[us] guys are jumping the gun’. That sounds like being pretty sure that maybe giving the fucking fascists what they want was a good fucking idea

[Srkdqltr]

43. If they shut it down, they don't have to start it up again!!! Than we will be in deeper shit than now.

Maybe that's too simplistic, but not impossible.

[Think. Again.]

53. You really think even their own magats would let them keep it shut down?

[Srkdqltr]

57. Did you think their own would let them do what they are doing now? Of course they would cheer it.

Sticking it to the dems or some mystical entity is the point.

[Think. Again.]

64. I think it might actually have been the turning point we need...

...to have the magats suffering enough from the shut down that they finally break the trance the fascists have them under.

[druidity33]

72. Nah. Think again. nt.

[Think. Again.]

73. Well, sooner or later the magats will start feeling the effects of trump....

...we'll have to wait and see how they react.

[hadEnuf]

108. There is no negotiating with Trump and the Republican party. None.

These people are authoritarians. Nothing else resonates with them, and any sign of hesitation or willingness to compromise is immediately exploited as a weakness.

Hitler intentionally broke every treaty he ever signed in order to obtain a tactical advantage. What do we expect from people who idolize him?

[shanti]

16. Don't forget Bernie

He was so right.

[angrychair]

17. True

I'll add him 😁

[Scrivener7]

18. Yes. Apparently we are bad Democrats if we agree with the hundreds of Democrats

and disagree with 10 of them.

[Tribetime]

19. What's going on now and what will go on in the next six months

There's way worse than any shutdown.These people are out of touch with reality.They have their health insurance paid for they don't have to worry about stuff

[GiqueCee]

23. Uh oh...

... you lit my fuse! Everyone in Congress gets gold-plated healthcare at our expense, but when we ask why the rest of the country can't get the same health care, they whine poor-mouth, Oh, it would be too expensive to care for the hoi polloi, too! Which is total bullshit. Corporatists know that universal healthcare would be cheaper, but they'd lose the leverage that providing coverage through employers gives them to keep the workforce chained to their desks.

[Marcuse]

30. Yep. Insurers, like bookies, set the odds and take their vigorish.

Insurers supporting universal healthcare would be analogous to numbers bankers supporting government lotteries. Obamacare is a compromise whereby the bookies still collect their vig.

[Blue Full Moon]

20. They are 100% correct.

[Emile]

21. Shutting down the government would have hurt Democrats.

I've seen that message in other threads.

If that was true, the majority party (Republicans) would have shut her down just to hurt the Democrats.

[Joinfortmill]

22. I think it's complicated.

[angrychair]

26. What's complicated?

Please explain how the majority of people are wrong and only these 10 people were right?

[Joinfortmill]

56. Please, I didn't say anyone was wrong.

I said it was complicated. We're on the same side here, but sometimes you wouldn't know it.

[angrychair]

68. I apologize if that came across as rude

Wasn't my intention. Just frustrated. My point has never really been about which decision would give us the best outcome for government. That was irrelevant. It's about what it has done from the perspective of public perception.
From BlueSky to people I know, many have dropped their financial support and even moved to "unaffiliated" in their Party voter registration over this. The Democratic leadership has been lackluster at best and then they do this...it is a recipe for disaster. I mean, unless things changed, Schumer is out on a book tour. And two or three weeks ago it was Jefferies out on a book tour. We are in one of the greatest test of democracy and the leaders of the opposition party basically showing it's not a priority. Given the current situation that was not the best decision. But they are doing it anyway.

[Joinfortmill]

77. I hear you.

[orangecrush]

24. Perplexing

To say the least.

[liberalla]

25. This post by lapucelle helped me see it from a different perspective:

Schumer made the smart move.

Like we've all read, it was a no-win situation. I was opposed to passing the CR, however this thoughtful
post has helped me see that there are benefits to avoiding a shutdown.

Give it a look and you may also feel a little better about the vote.

[angrychair]

28. I appreciate the sentiment

But I've already read it and it didn't change my mind at all.
Mainly because if doesn't address my core question in my OP, "How are hundreds of some of the most respected Democrats and pro-democracy intellectuals wrong and just these 10 people right?"

[Amaryllis]

54. Same here. WHat changed my opinion was when I learned that a shutdown could be permanent. And they would

have no reason to start it up again.

[MontanaFarmer]

27. I certainly think it's more nuanced politically than that.

The senate caucus, I believe, decided to let the bill pass. They picked members at little risk politically to take the vote, other than Cortez masto who was maybe there on her own. I don't believe for a minute that the senate caucus was legitimately split 10 against the rest with all sides of the ideological spectrum represented in both groups.

[angrychair]

32. That seems unlikely

Most of those against came out with public statements that were pretty unequivocal.
Plus that doesn't answer to the hundreds of professional Democrats outside the Senate or pro-democracy intellectuals outside the Senate. They were all wrong too?
Those 10 people decided they were right and everyone else was wrong and we have to live with that decision.

[ibegurpard]

33. 11 people

Jared Golden from Maine. The ONE Democrat out of the entire Democratic House caucus that voted for it.
And make no mistake voting for cloture was a vote FOR this CR no matter how you try to spin it... unless you knew that there were Republicans who'd join you against it in a floor vote.

[mountain grammy]

29. No they were wrong

And I refuse to blame Democrats for what happens. There were 10. We cannot blame Democrats. Period! End of discussion!

[angrychair]

40. I agree

But most people will not. They see it as symptomatic of a bigger issue with the Democratic Party. The response by most elected Democrats have been tepid at best. Every one of them should be exercising every parliamentary move in the book to hamper Republicans. Barging into federal agencies demanding to know what they are doing. If they are arrested for protesting or trespassing then so be it. It's for the cause of democracy. That is what people want to see.

[3825-87867]

34. Senators and Representatives are elected to do the will of the voters

who gave them America's "lavish life-style."
No where does it say they are to make their own decisions over the views and wants of a majority of their constituents.
They are supposed to REPRESENT, at the very least, the majority of the people who voted them into office.
These ten basically told their voters they didn't care what those they represent thought, they'll do what they want.
Democracy, my ass.

[Wiz Imp]

41. If that were true we would have never had the Civil Right Act pass

same-sex marriage would be illegal & there would have been no affordable care act

Those things all enjoy majority support now, but at the time they were passed, the majority of the public opposed all of them.

Thank God our representatives didn't think like you do.

And by your logic, we should be OK with Trump because he listened to the people who voted for him - almost everything he is doing is perfectly in line with what he said he would do during the campaign or was detailed in Project 2025.

Was it a good thing when almost all of Congress supported the invasion of Iraq because they were doing what their constituents wanted? Even at the time, many in Congress weren't totally convinced it was the right thing to do, but they went along with popular opinion. The country would have been a hell of a lot better off has more in Congress displayed the courage of their convictions and opposed the war.

[MichMan]

81. I doubt a majority of residents in their states wanted the government to be shut down.

Perhaps that is why they voted for cloture.

[SunSeeker]

35. No. 10 took the bullets so the others can stand on principle. I get it.

In 6 months, when the economy tanks from Trump’s tariffs and firings, Republicans won't be able to blame it on a shutdown forced by Democrats, like they blamed covid when the economy tanked last time he was in office.

Hopefully in 6 months when this CR expires, every Democrat and Independent, and maybe even a few Republicans, can stand together to oppose Trump's budget and support the Depocratic alternative budget (there better be one!).

It will be undisputable at that point that it is Trump who is tanking the economy.

[angrychair]

42. Sorry to brust that bubble

But that isn't what is going to happen. The committees are forming their budgets now and putting them in what is called a reconciliation bill. That bill cannot be filibustered and only requires a simple majority to pass on both sides. The Democrats cannot stop it. The Republican CR goes a long ways to kick starting that process.

There will not be another CR or budget fight. That was our one and only chance to stop what is coming.

[SunSeeker]

47. It's not a "bubble." Dial back the condescension a touch.

There is barely a Republican majority right now in the House. We would only have to peel off a few votes and Trump’s budget would never leave the House.

[angrychair]

50. We blew our chances

To win those Florida and New York seats with this nonsense. Our only chance is that things become so toxic we may be able to retake the House in 2026 but I think the damage is way to deep. We will see I guess.

[Bluetus]

44. Yes, according to the K-street beltway creatures that control things

I bet you would find that nearly 100% of them are "rush to the center" types. They are working for corporations, so they have no use for any populist politics. And here's the sad truth -- they don't care if the Dem Party fails. They get paid either way. When a party is out of power, they may be willing to pay MORE to get back into power.

These beltway creatures simply don't have the best interests of the Party in mind.

[Tribetime]

55. Screw Fetterman and the others...he dresses like he's poor

Supporting the working class poor but he has no idea what people are already going thru ....Screw all of them I hope all members of the democratic Congress and Senate totally IGNORE them from now on.

[Morbius]

61. There is indeed a third option.

That is, neither side was right. Shutting the government down was a bad call, and agreeing to the CR was a bad call.

The 10 people were wrong. Everyone else was wrong.

The CR was designed to screw America and the Democrats while they were at it, and it succeeded in both ways. This is what a majority of Americans voted for. America, as we knew it, is gone now. The question before us is this: what do we do now?

[LudwigPastorius]

62. I think it's more like...

9 Democrats opted to eat a cold shit sandwich as opposed to a hot one.

[Emile]

63. The defense of the 10 remind me of Garland.

[EdmondDantes_]

65. Faulty reasoning using the logical fallacy of appeal to majority

To demonstrate this think about Galileo and how he was put under house arrest because his science went against the commonly accepted rules of his time. Was he wrong simply because the majority thought he was?

More recently the majority of people opposed same sex marriage. We're the supports of same sex marriage wrong just because a majority of the public and a majority of Democrats opposed it?

The Iraq war under George W Bush, slavery, women's right to vote, black people's right to vote, trans rights.

A plurality of voters voted for Trump. I'm pretty sure nobody here thinks we're wrong just because we're in the minority.

[angrychair]

71. Not about the majority

Though that is important. The point was there are literally hundreds of members of Congress and pro-democracy intellectuals and organizations, not to mention millions of voters, that believed that a no on cloture and stopping TSF power grab was the best option among shitty options.
Giving that just hours later he was at justice demanding the arrest of his political enemies, that seems like it was the better answer.

More importantly, that was Democrats one and only opportunity to stop the gutting of government. From this point forward there is literally nothing they can do to stop the Republicans on the budget to gut government. We literally legitimized it with that vote.

[EdmondDantes_]

75. Weird that you say it's not about the majority since that's the entire argument

Even in this response, you immediately say that millions of people didn't want this as evidence that Schumer's vote was wrong.

Make your case without that.

[Autumn]

70. As far as he is concerned, these 10 democrats and every fucking republican were right

Schumer's "internal gyroscope came to a strong conclusion".

Which is kind of like an imaginary friend on "his throne" .

I think we need new leadeship.

[Martin Eden]

76. Does the majority of US citizens want the government to be shut down for a long extended period of time?

I very much doubt that. I think public pressure would mount in a manner that would far surpass the anger we've seen at town halls, to re-open our government.

In other words, I don't think the shut-down would last for an extended period. The question is how this would play out politically in terms of the BLAME GAME.

Generally, the administration in power gets blamed for what happens on its watch. A shut-down would be part and parcel of the chaos and deeply unpopular actions of the unelected Musk and his rats. If the Democrats have any messaging skills whatsoever they could reinforce that the CR (which really wasn't a Continuing Resolution at all) would give even more unconstitutional power to Musk for taking a chainsaw to our government.

If our elected Democrats can't effectively deliver that message, then our representative democracy is doomed no matter what.

If we can't make a stand on Constitutional principle then America will fall into tyranny at the hands of a vindictive malignant narcissist and his ketamine addled billionare megalomaniacal hatchet man.

Instead, a small fraction of Democrats in Congress gave in to extortion, ending the principled stand of the majority.

I don't know for certain if America is doomed now or was doomed no matter what our Senators did.

It's in our hands now, and the courts -- but the fundamental principle of those court cases has just been undermined by Congress willingly ceding its Constitutional power to a president who has been placed above the law.

[AkFemDem]

78. It was all theater! They were all in on it

The magical number of democrats vote to ensure passage of the CR, this wasn't an accident. Whatever pearl clutching we see out of other democrats, this all went according to plan to allow for "moderate" dem senators to retain their moderate binafides with their constituents, more liberal dems could retain their more liberal bonafies, and everyone could ensure gov wouldn't shut down with democrats taking the blame for it. All according to plan.

[3825-87867]

80. So the 10 were right and tramp and the republicans would do nothing to harm America even though

the vast majority of us knew the Garland fiasco would end the way it did and that we were duped into Afghanistan, Iraq, the Banksters (thanx Obama), the selections for SCOTUS because many or most believed, "it'll be ok..because they said so" (and it really doesn't affect us, right?) Yet that didn't stop quite a number of (now disappeared commenters) from using POSSIBLE arguments to try to show a majority (of us) was incorrect - that we needed to give Garland time to get things right - by law!. Their positions turned out poorly. And while it's possible that the outcome will be as Schumer and damn few others believe, it's hard to understand how and why, given trumps record, ANYONE can advance even an iota of positivity or truth from anything he or republicans say or do.

Since tramp is so for this, I presume those who support the 10 must believe they are right, which, of course, is their choice but using select past examples of popular support being wrong as "proof" then doesn't mean this time will be the same. But using those examples to show "we" could be wrong, simply shows they seemingly accept whatever tramp says even if these pseudo Democrats take more concern over their big donors than us peons. Or better yet, MAYBE it'll be ok if we just "stay the course" and see what happens. Surely SOMEONE will come along and make things better? Maybe a Biden in in our future (not immediate but 5 or 10 years down the line) and that will straighten all this out and things will be swell again.. til another conservative group ASSumes power. Then we do it all over again because that's what THEY want and we're too stupid to do anything about it...because, maybe they'll see the light or whatever. Let's give them yet another chance.

There's no "quid" with him. At least WE have seen and KNOW that he has lied before and gone back on every thing he promised to do to help...us? And yet they and some others believe him or accept that the sky won't fall because he says so and things will be just fine (or even great again!!!). Almost every statement he's made could be interpreted to refer to his covey of crooks, not us.
Make America Great Again? He's gonna make millions from tariffs (didn't say for who gets the millions). Never said it would be for the people. Maybe he really meant to make the upper class great(er) again - trillion dollar tax cuts for them, destruction of the environment so they can add more wealth to their already massive benefit of tax cuts yet bread lines for us! But SOMEONE is gonna be great again, right? So why should he be given ANY credence for ANYTHING he or is ilk say? He shouldn't. But many "Democrats" will still consider his ramblings.

If the 10 or anyone believes ANYTHING tramp or any republican says, I got a country to sell them...cheap!

You know what? Screw it. We deserve what we got. American's entitled world has been upset and they are now pissed and can't understand why it happened (to them) and really can't comprehend anything! Americans have been dumbed down by 60 years of republican/corporate BS, lies and exaggerations and have now graduated to real life and must live with someone else's control. And they don't have the mental capability or desire to even try to understand why it happened. Hey! Where's the media? No one told us this would happen! We don't want to live like those other countries. This isn't what WE are entitled to.
No shit!

[tritsofme]

82. Those 10 were the adults who stopped a tragic shutdown

that would have allowed Musk/Trump to keep the government shutdown indefinitely while they dismantled it completely.

Those 10 acted so that the rest could cynically pander and posture in front of cameras and on social media, they are the true cowards of this story.

Thank goodness for the adults.

[Emile]

85. Those 10 voted with the Republican majority.

Period

[tritsofme]

87. They did the right thing, and denied Musk the shutdown he desperately wanted.

And prevented an indefinite shutdown that would have enabled Musk/Trump to completely dismantle the government.

Thank goodness.

[Emile]

88. Trump and Musk think they did the right thing too.

If Trump and Musk wanted the shutdown, they would have ordered their majority party to shut it down.

[tritsofme]

89. They wanted a shutdown "caused" by Democrats to muddy the waters

for voters.

Not to mention the courts would run out of money and have to shutdown within a few weeks.

The whole thing would have been catastrophic.

[Emile]

90. Trump praised Schumer

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5194773-trump-schumer-government-funding/

IMO anyone defending this are using right-wing talking points.

[tritsofme]

91. A good indication that Trump is lying is that his lips are moving.

But that’s nice for you.

[Emile]

92. Is Schumer dotting the I and crossing the t?

[tritsofme]

94. I have no idea what that is supposed to mean, but sure.

[Emile]

95. LOL

[Ping Tung]

83. "History has tried to teach us that we can't have good government under politicians.

"History has tried to teach us that we can't have good government under politicians. Now, to go and stick one at the very head of government couldn't be wise." Mark Twain

[LizBeth]

93. Maybe it is a situation both a little bit right, both a little bit wrong. I seem to read valid and strong

points on both choices, neither make us the winner.

[aeromanKC]

99. The only ones in the wrong are Trump and his MAGAt cult.

They all can go to hell!!

I've got no negativity towards any Democratic party member. None.

[angrychair]

100. Right now, instead of doing his job

So after helping TSF pass legislation that legitimatized everything TSF and eLoon has done and conceding almost unlimited power to the executive branch and being personally thanked by TSF, Schumer is on a book tour in which he charges people for the privilege of speaking to him for a couple minutes.
If you are an elected official, ANY elected official, charging people to speak to you, you are a grifter.