Fuck yeah
Shut it down
Let the protests and riots really kick off
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2025
141 points (99.3% liked)
politics
25872 readers
3481 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm starting to think the American people put the wrong party in power.
Oh man, the Nazi machine won't have funding? Guess it's back to individual states for us.
Unfortunately, I think the parts they care about would continue as "essential" while the parts everyone else cares about would shut down.
Is that actually what this would mean?
There's provisions for various parts of the govt to continue.
Don't worry. Schumer will find a way to bloomberg out.
REALLY hoping the pushback of "What if we give trump everything he wants and ask him to let us vote on the ACA in a few months?" was large enough.
Jeffries dismissed the video in a social media response, saying "Bigotry will get you nowhere."
Really? From my perspective, bigotry can send you to the Presidency....
It's super effective.
Just imagine how well we could all be doing if we just treated each other like subhuman garbage.
I'm told by some that Biden should have staged a (successful) coup to prevent this.
Media wants everyone to panic...
But we literally didn't have a budget all of last fiscal year
The Senate can pass a budget with only Republican votes using budget reconciliation. They don't want to use it on the budget because they want to use it to jam thru something else.
Instead of "negotiating" Schumer should just keep repeating that a budget could be passed at any moment, without a single D vote, if trump could unite his party and get them to vote as a block.
There's no budget, because trump can't control his party or his voters.
The Reconciliation rules limit the Senate to only one reconciliation bill that deals with the Budget per year, and Republicans blew their wad on the One Big Trumpy Bill.
Why did they use their one shot to get a budget bill passed with only Republican votes and not address these critical appropriations? Because they want a shutdown, and will use it to fire the rest of the Federal Government worker that they have declared war on.
Typically, the reconciliation process begins when the president submits a budget to Congress early in the calendar year. In response, each chamber of Congress begins a parallel budget process, starting in the Senate Budget Committee and the House Budget Committee.[5] Each budget committee proposes a budget resolution setting spending targets for the upcoming fiscal year
Want to take a guess what the first day of the next fiscal year?
They used it on the "BBB" last fiscal year, because they never used it to pass a budget.
So this time, they want to not use it for a budget again, so they can use it for something else again...
I'm genuinely asking:
What is so hard to understand about this?
Because it legitimately feels like people are intentionally misunderstanding this, but maybe I'm just giving random social media accounts too much credit, and you just never read anything you link to see if it really agrees with you, or like in this scenario, just rooves you're wrong.
I don't think it proves I'm wrong....
You are saying that Schumer should be obstinate because Republicans could have passed this budget through reconciliation. But they can't, because they already used their reconciliation vote.
Republicans made a conscious choice where they used up their reconciliation bill without addressing the budget precisely to push this situation, where they can try to pin a shutdown on Democrats despite being in full control of both chambers. They forced a situation whwre they need Democrats to vote for cloture, so they can be blamed.
They plan an awful budget, but if there is a shutdown, they plan other awful things. There is no good path for Schumer here, because Republicans are hell bent on making Federal workers suffer, one way or another. At least he is trying to negotiate something on healthcare, so that if Republicans do try to pin the shutdown on Democrats, they can at least say "we were trying to save your healthcare".
You are saying that Schumer should be obstinate because Republicans could have passed this budget through reconciliation. But they can’t, because they already used their reconciliation vote.
They can CR with 50 votes, like they did multiple times last fiscal year.
And in 14.5 hours use the new Senate reconciliation to pass a new budget.
I'm still skipping steps, that's still just a summary.
If you genuinely don't understand how this works. Stop making assumptions and start asking questions.
At least he is trying to negotiate something on healthcare
How in the fuck can anyone in 2025 America think trump is going to negotiate in good faith about anything, especially healthcare?
so that if Republicans do try to pin the shutdown on Democrats,
Jesus fucking Christ, we've come full circle...
Schumer "negotiating" is only happening so trump can blame no budget on Dems, when Republicans have the votes
How are you not getting this?
Why are you so confident in the false conclusions you're leaping to?
I am literally agreeing with you, except you are insisting that the rules say something other than what they say. If Republicans are going through so much trouble to pin the blame on Democrats, they will never do the things you suggest that they "have the votes" for.
They don't have the votes, but they also purposely put themselves in position to not have the votes.
I am literally agreeing with you
You think you are...
I have no idea why you think that, or why you think we agree...
Because you're still saying the opposite.
Even after I've made several attempts to clarify.
Have you never been in a situation where someone has misunderstood you, and think they're saying the same thing? Even after you repeatedly clarify over and over?
Like, it might be a long shot, but this is the only way I can think of explaining it, seeing if you can put yourself in the other side of this conversation.
We are not saying the same thing, and I think you're gonna need to understand that before I can explain why what we're saying is different.
Working as intended. Every federal employee and many, many contractors being held as pawns. How do government shutdowns benefit the working American? Please let me know. Is this what winning feels like?
Senate Democrats have refused to back the spending bill in an effort to force Republicans to negotiate on federal health care subsidies.
Naturally, this is all the Democrats fault for not letting the republicans steamroll them with their anti-American (and frankly, anti-human) policies. Great job, media.
Naturally, this is all the Democrats fault for not letting the republicans steamroll them with their anti-American (and frankly, anti-human) policies. Great job, media.
(Emphases about blaming the media mine) Seriously, WTF? What other way could they have reported that? They're refusing to back the bill without ACA extensions and repealing the cuts to health care programs. As far as reasons go and playing hardball, that's a pretty good one (or two).
And if NPR didn't include that info about Democrats refusing to back the R spending bill, then you all would be complaining that "Oh, the Democrats do nothing blah blah whine whine blah both sides".
As far as "the media" goes, NPR is pretty top-tier. I swear, I am starting to think half the people here just do not understand how journalism works.
"Republicans could pass their anti-human agenda any time they want by using reconciliation, a process that can only be used 3x per Senate term, but they have too much infighting to agree on which people need to be hurt the most".
I mean, I'm no journalist. I'm sure that could be tweaked better. Either way, the Dems aren't to blame here. Trump could pass this if he could get his party to cooperate.
Aside from mentioning the reconciliation process (which I agree could have been included), that's not even close to actual journalism. It might fly on from one of the talking heads spewing endless opinions shows on cable, but reputable outlets do not "report" that way.
Quality outlets also do not (or should not, anyway) point blame in such a brazen manner. They should report the facts and list some potential effects of those, but they shouldn't tell you how to feel or sink into the petty bickering of the subject matter.
I'm old-school and grew up before the plague of 24-hour cable news and worked for two different newspapers, so I'm, I guess, a little more sensitive to the sensationalist crap that gets called "news" these days. I guess what I'm saying is that this article passes my "sniff test".
I agree with you on quality outlets. My phrasing was definitely partisan and you're right, that's something NPR tries to avoid for the sake of journalistic integrity.
But, much like the tolerance paradox, journalistic integrity is great, but that and 3.50 still can't afford coffee.
Still, I, a left-wing hippie nut job, managed to pull out a sentence and read it as blaming the Dems.
Because NPR has tilted right for decades. They do it like that. "Just the facts, ma'am."
There's no such thing as an objective point of view. It's not possible.
What is possible is saying something with enough implied meaning that saying the blandest version of the official narrative is supporting it. In this case the official narrative is that Democrats are doing bad things.
Here's the difference: A lot of "low-tier" "news" outlets don't know how to do that so they just put their spin on it and call it a day. NPR doesn't work like that. Their audience is too smart for that. So - they have to sound like a 1948 MovieTone Newsreel. Black-and-white. Short, direct sentences. But if you look at those old MovieTone newsreels, you can pretty well grok their point of view pretty easily. Relentlessly American, patriarchal, strident.
Is anyone confused that the republiQan spending bill is extracting the maximum amount of money from the working class to give to the very wealthy? Is anyone confused that that's what's going on here? Democrats who have no power whatsoever have one chance and this is it - so why frame the story like the Democrats are doing this. Why? Because it's true - enough. And, by doing it that way we avoid blaming the republiQans for being truly disgusting lackeys for the billionaires. And, we avoid getting sued by trump. And, we want the republiQans to win anyway. That's why it reads like that.
This is not an outlier in their reporting. This is NPR. This is how they do.
The people charged with coming to an agreement should lose their positions when they refuse to do their jobs.
They could pass a continuing bill that keeps things as they are. All agreed. Govt stays open.
Why wouldn't they do that instead of let the government shut down?
If only pragmatism could prevail, perhaps the elected could do the good work they promise the electorate.
First time?