He expressed that a shutdown will favor Trump and Musk, so sounds reasonable?

  • kandoh@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    9 hours ago

    If a shutdown would favor trump and musk, than why were they celebrating his vote to keep the government open?

    Because he’s lying. He just didn’t want to lose his staff and clubhouse access for however long it lasted.

  • DomeGuy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Schumer said that a shutdown would enable Trump to arbitrarily shutter parts of the government he doesn’t like.

    Trump is already shuttering the parts of the government he doesn’t like, and the “CR” gives those acts the veneer of lawfulness.

    If there had been a shutdown there would likely have been more pain in more places. But the Dems could have plausibly negotiated for a better result than what Schumer voted for, and aside from the pain of the shutdown itself it’s not at all clear how the end result would be any worse than what we got


    And despite what Fetterman and the other Senate Democrat collaborators might claim, a vote for cloture was a vote for the bill to become law. The rules of the Senate are dumb, but “this bill would not have passed save for that vote” is a pretty empirical rebuttal.

  • artificialfish
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    I also understand it’s reasonable. But you have to remember this bill will hurt many people. The logic is that Dems should show opposition not complicity for those people to have a positive reason to vote for them in 2y, and maybe to reach a deal that prevents some harm. Otherwise people might not even know the bill happened, and what the consequences were, and why republicans suck. The other strategy though is to let Trump fuck everything up so bad over 4y people basically riot to oust him. In that scenario you don’t want to give him the chance to say any of the things he did wrong were your fault, which interference would cause. The problem is he will anyway, because he’s a pathological liar.

      • artificialfish
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        Pretty much. And if you take this view, why not go down fighting? Dems really need the advertising. Schumer is basically rolling over for big donors, and unwittingly opening the door for more progressive politicians to take over the mindshare in the party more permanently.

        Unlike in 2016, there definitely won’t be a moderate “Hillary bro” crowd in 2026. There will be the people who literally want to behead Trump in the White House lawn, and the AoC/Bernie party.

        • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 hours ago

          I disagree with that take.

          Trump’s gutting of federal agencies has only highlighted all the things we take for granted and/or didn’t even know were benefiting us. With a shutdown, that all comes to a stop, and the workers who are deemed “essential” still have to work but don’t get paid. Remember the last shutdowns?

          TSA workers still have to work unpaid. ICE isn’t going anywhere. Think they’re thugs now? Wait till they’re not getting a paycheck and taking their (extra) anger out on their victims.

          And Musk/DOGE? With all but essential workers furloughed, I have no doubt the dismantling and fuckery will continue except now they’re basically running around with even less supervision than they have now.

          Like it or not, Schumer made a hard, but likely correct, call to see the bigger picture.

          • artificialfish
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            The budget is the death nail to those agencies so they are going away shut down or not.

            But if we shutdown EVERYTHING we might be able to show how stupid that is and make it temporary or get some concessions.

    • Cptn_Slow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I couldn’t find the specifics in a quick Google search, and since this is OOTL I guess I’ll ask here.

      And I know I’m about to be shit on for even asking, genuinely, what are the parts of the bill that will hurt people?

      All the articles I could find were just how trump would weaponize the shutdown, nothing I could find stated the specifics of the bill.

      • artificialfish
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        From what I’ve heard it’s just a complete funding cut to all the agencies he’s promised to “destroy”, whose firings have already affected lives like with USAID, the EPA, etc. Idk if there’s medical cuts in there, but there’s definitely cuts to research grants on medicine. And instead of using the savings to pay off the deficit, he’s using it to fund tax cuts to his billionaire friends.

        I will never understand how Americans are dumb enough to believe you can cut taxes and pay off the deficit. It’s like if you had credit card debt then quit your job. Oh and in this case you don’t get to quit your job, it’s your neighbor in the mansion next door who probably got us into debt to begin with or owns the debt.

        • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          I will never understand how Americans are dumb enough to believe you can cut taxes and pay off the deficit.

          If your cuts to programs are greater than the loss from cutting taxes it’s absolutely possible. That’s simple math. Not that I agree with trump obviously but your argument is flawed.

          • artificialfish
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            Well that’s what they say they are doing but it’s still not flawed. If I wanted to pay off my debt effectively and quickly I’d get a better job AND reduce my spending. So higher taxes (preferably on the rich) and reduce spending (preferably on non essentials like the military overspending)

            All I’m saying is as my parents let’s say you would question my decisions if I did what you suggest, cut my hours but cut my spending MORE. That would be kinda sus.

            That’s a much more logical approach, and I think the argument makes it pretty clear that fixing the deficit is not in Republican interests, it’s just lip service. Which is a big problem since the deficit could destroy the economy in the near future.

            • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 hours ago

              Oh I agree. Also some of these programs are pretty important. And even the less important ones exist for a reason. I’m not necessarily against trimming the fat but it should be given more consideration than “CLOSE ALL THE THINGS!!”

  • Burninator05@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    My, quite possibly naive, take is that i think people are mad because he flipped. He said that he absolutely wouldn’t vote for it and then flipped a day latter and said he would. This riled Dems up to fight and then immediately sent against what he had started. I also don’t think that he has explained himself as to why he changed his mind.