By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following a compromise by eight Senate Democrats with Republicans to end the government shutdown without securing healthcare concessions, Democratic anger is primarily directed at Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. Criticism from various groups and some House members accuses Schumer of leadership failures, with calls for his resignation. This situation mirrors a previous funding battle where Schumer faced similar backlash. Although Schumer did not publicly support the compromise, the deal authorizes funding through January and promises a vote on extending ACA tax credits, raising concerns within the party.
Read the original article here
Angry Democrats call on Schumer to resign after eight votes to end the shutdown. The sentiment is loud and clear: many Democrats are furious with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer after a deal was struck to end the government shutdown, a deal they view as a capitulation. The overwhelming feeling is one of betrayal, with accusations of weak leadership and a failure to stand up to the Republicans.
The core of the anger stems from the perceived lack of tangible gains for Democrats. Healthcare, specifically the Affordable Care Act (ACA), was a central issue during the shutdown. Yet, the agreement offered nothing concrete beyond a promise of a future vote on extending ACA subsidies, a promise that many see as insufficient and lacking in any real leverage. This perceived failure to secure meaningful concessions is a major point of contention.
Furthermore, the timing of the deal has fueled the fire. Many believe Democrats had gained political momentum following recent elections that demonstrated a public rebuke of Trump and his policies. This perceived advantage was squandered, and Republicans are expected to capitalize on the situation, portraying Democrats as the ones who unnecessarily prolonged the shutdown. This narrative, according to many, is easily spun given the lack of substantial achievements from the Democratic side.
The broader context of this frustration is the belief that Democrats are consistently outmaneuvered by Republicans. The deal, in this view, reinforces a pattern of Democrats “kowtowing” and making concessions without gaining anything in return. The feeling is that the party leadership lacks the will to fight, opting instead for performative politics. Many believe that Schumer is not fit to lead the party in the Senate.
The criticisms go beyond just the specifics of the deal. Many see Schumer as part of an establishment that prioritizes corporate interests over those of ordinary Americans. The belief is that he is out of touch and unwilling to challenge the status quo, effectively serving as “controlled opposition.” The phrase, “It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it,” echoes the sentiment that the leadership is more concerned with maintaining power and playing the political game than with representing the needs of the electorate.
The anger is also directed at the Democrats who voted to end the shutdown. The calls for resignations aren’t solely aimed at Schumer. Some people believe that anyone who voted to end the shutdown without significant gains is complicit in his failure and should also be held accountable. The feeling is that their votes will be remembered and held against them in the future.
This discontent is reflected in the calls for action. Many are urging their fellow citizens to contact their Senators and demand new leadership. The call to action extends beyond simply voicing disapproval; people are urging their peers to support primary challenges against those perceived as weak or ineffective. The idea is to replace the old guard with a new generation of leaders willing to challenge the establishment and fight for the party’s values.
The frustration is also directed towards the idea of electoral action with a two-party system. Some are calling for a third or fourth party to gain traction. The sentiment is that the Democratic party has failed to represent the interests of its voters and has instead become an echo of the Republican party. The solution, in their eyes, is to create a new political force that will challenge the status quo and push for real change.
The debate also delves into the nature of political action. Some individuals express a deep sense of despair, even entertaining the idea that more radical actions will be necessary, or inevitable. The feeling is that the political system is broken and that more drastic measures may be required to bring about real change.
The final sentiment shows the idea that the Democratic party is beholden to donors, not constituents. The perception is that the party establishment is more interested in fundraising and maintaining power than in fighting for its core values. The result is a deep sense of disillusionment and a feeling that their voices are not being heard.