this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
6 points (62.5% liked)
Out of the loop
12075 readers
72 users here now
A community that helps people stay up to date with things going on.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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.
I believe the expression is "Damned if you do, damned if you don't."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!!"