Should Democrats be willing to shutdown the government?
NYT, No PaywallThe arguments for a shutdown vary: to bring attention to the abuses of power of Trump; to wring policy concessions, particularly on health care; to demand an end to impoundment and rescission and other deal breaking; to push Trump back toward constitutional governance; to pick a fight because Democrats need a fight, and it would help party unity. Are they all wrongheaded?
Generally, they are all misguided, and none of them are likely to work. But I also think you can rank them. The worst idea is to shut down the government over general Trump abuses or lawlessness. That will probably never work at a policy level how could it? and would tend to unify the G.O.P. while Democrats bickered over the strategy and eventually split over whether to continue the shutdown. The public will likely be confused about what the Democrats are even demanding.
Shutting the government down over a specific list of actual policy demands makes somewhat more sense. The health care subsidies are popular, and are perhaps a reasonable thing to fight for. Definitely something to try to negotiate. But once you shut down the government, you arent going to win those concessions. So you are probably better off just operating normally, trying to get winnable Republicans on board with the extension, and keep the stakes low.

sinkingfeeling
(56,345 posts)reACTIONary
(6,710 posts).... you had already made up your mind on that 😊
sinkingfeeling
(56,345 posts)gab13by13
(29,800 posts)The horses are out of the barn and it would have been a lot easier to get protections for them before they were let loose.
The onus is on them to provide funding that will get the Democratic reps to vote for it. To just let it go and vote for it would be to vote for dump to keep on doing what he is doing. This is the one place where we can hold dump and the republicans to account. We have to demand some pretty radical things for sure, like having things like they were before dump took a wrecking ball to it. Such radical things that we had for a long time. This is not hard.
reACTIONary
(6,710 posts).... that won't work.
Their opponents simply demanded a reopening of the government while pointing out all the ways the shutdown was hurting federal workers and American citizens. Eventually, the shutdown coalition cracked, the government reopened, they didnt win their policy major objectives, and they were worse off politically going forward.
It would unify the repugs, and make it harder to negotiate.
If not a shutdown, what should Democrats do?
It sounds like doing nothing, but right now, doing nothing is probably the best strategy. Trump is unpopular, the midterms are rarely kind to the incumbent president, and in all likelihood, the Democrats are going to control the House and pick up seats in the Senate. Save the big fights for 2027, when they are on much firmer electoral, political and institutional footing.
Eko
(9,687 posts)Personally I think rolling over on this will be the last bad decision our party could do because if we let them do what they want to do it wont matter if you have a D or an R behind your name. Its not like we would be asking for crazy things, just to put a lot of things like they have been and are supposed to be per our Constitution. US citizens are being arrested by masked thugs and held for having the wrong skin color. The asshole president has created executive orders to nullify amendments. He has withheld funds appropriated by Congress, extra-judicially killed people with our military, put the military and his brownshirts in our streets! . These are not minor political disagreements he is dismantling our Democratic Government!! Do you really think we have 13 months left at this rate? They are not going to wait for the midterms, I can tell you that frankly. They are not going to wait. I give it 6 months and his cronies will control the majority of the media and social media. Either outright owning it, using the threat of litigation or just straight out threatening it (like it did today) to force them to fold. I've read this history book. I've seen this documentary. Multiple times I have seen, and read and listened to it. When Hitler won power he put judges that supported him and would let his thugs off while imprisoning the opposition for violent actions.
Does this sound familiar?
In 1935, local prosecutors brought 23 SA (Brownshirts) guards at the camp to trial on charges of torture and brutal mistreatment, including widespread suiciding of prisoners. The SA defendants were all convicted and sentenced to prison.
Within a year, they were all out, released on Hitlers orders. After the trial, senior Nazi officials demanded their release and acquittal. Then, in November 1935, Hitler pardoned every last one of the convicted men.
The things that dump is doing is right out of the Autocrats playbook.
Tell me why we want to vote for funding that?
So that later down the road we can vote in an election in an Autocratic country?
Tell me when that worked.
reACTIONary
(6,710 posts).... would maybe be the authors answer:
Generally, they are all misguided, and none of them are likely to work. But I also think you can rank them. The worst idea is to shut down the government over general Trump abuses or lawlessness. That will probably never work at a policy level how could it? and would tend to unify the G.O.P. while Democrats bickered over the strategy and eventually split over whether to continue the shutdown. The public will likely be confused about what the Democrats are even demanding.
Eko
(9,687 posts)I don't think we have that long.
Do you?
reACTIONary
(6,710 posts)..... what if we don't? How would shutting down the government prevent whatever it is you fear? In fact, it might accelerate whatever it is, or provide a pretext?
There may be good reasons to play chicken with a shutdown threat, but I don't see how that would stop apocalypse now.
Eko
(9,687 posts)And I am wrong but I dont think I am. How would putting back in the safeguards that keep us a Democracy stop this? That a president doesnt have the power to change constitutional amendments, that the power of the purse is Congresses, that the laws have to followed? I believe it is self evident.