this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2025
348 points (100.0% liked)

politics

26418 readers
2457 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer offered a new plan to Republicans that would allow the U.S. government to reopen after a shutdown that began on Oct. 1.

But Republicans quickly dismissed Schumer’s proposal, which hinges on protecting enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies for at least one year.

Schumer’s proposal calls for Democrats to agree to pass a so-called clean resolution that would provide short-term funding for government operations.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Because you cant admit you’re wrong, I can’t?

I would be delighted to be wrong. And you’re fooling yourself if you think Schumer is up for a fight.

[–] MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What was I wrong about?

No, you won't admit it. You'll continue to oppose Schumer at all times and in all circumstances even when he does the thing you say you want him to do.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well for one thing, I do admit when I’m wrong.

You’re full of shit, so I assume it’s all projection.

Furthermore, this attempt at negotiating and compromise signals an intent to… you know… compromise…. With people that haven’t actually compromised in 20 years.

Which, if you have not been paying attention, is how we’ve come to be here.

Yeah, I have no reason to believe Schumer is going to do the right thing here, either.

[–] SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You assume the Democrats expected the Republicans to actually accept this. I'm certain they didn't, but now they can truthfully say that they tried to compromise to reopen the government and the Republicans still turned them down. Politics is very much a game, and this was the right move to play.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

First and foremost.

Let’s get one thing absolutely and crystal clear.

Politics is absolutely fucking not a fucking game and fuck you for callously saying it is.

40 million Americans are facing food insecurity because of this attitude.

24 million more will see their healthcare costs go up. Because of this attitude.

I could list a rather shocking amount of absolute and unmitigated shit that is happening right now, because of this attitude.

Making offers you know are nonstarters isn't negotiating. Especially offers that are largely unacceptable to your base. Fucking around with the lived and wellbeing of everyone here is not appropriate.

It was also unnecessary. Most of us realize that republicans are in control and that they could end the shut down with everything they wanted any time they want. (Also, could have stopped it from happening.)

Also, why would you trust a man that convinced the House to hold out, promising to vote against cloture the last time, only then to backstab everyone and vote for cloture?

There is no reason to; and he’s lost control of the democrat senators. As for last nights no-vote, I was somewhat relieved until certain of the other senators came out saying he approved it or whatever.

Not that I outright believe it, but it does suggest he knew they were turning rogue. Maybe one shouldn’t bullshit with things that won’t get accepted instead of shoring up the party unity.

(Maybe he should have endorsed Mamdani, too, for that matter.)