On his Substack Nate Silver remarks on the apparently imminent end of the government shutdown:
As someone who is supposed to take three cross-country flights over the next seven days, I’m happy that I won’t miss my meetings, I guess.
But as political strategy, I think this is malpractice. Predictable enough malpractice for a perpetually risk-averse party with a weak, unpopular leader who clearly doesn’t have confidence of his caucus. But malpractice all the same.
What happened in late October? There are a handful of plausible explanations, but I think the evidence is reasonably clear. On Oct. 18, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins warned voters that food stamps — more formally known as the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program or SNAP — would run out of funding at the end of the month. This program is a huge deal, affecting roughly 42 million Americans. Although Rollins tried to blame Democrats, voters didn’t buy that at all — not when the Trump has been fighting court orders to continue to fund the program, and holding Great Gatsby-themed dinners at Mar-a-Lago.
Google searches tell the story here. Since the shutdown began, searches for terms related to the Affordable Care Act — Democrats’ ostensible rationale for withholding votes — has never been more than a blip on the radar. Conversely, searches related to SNAP benefits increased roughly tenfold over their baseline beginning in late October.
The numbers really tell the story.
| Number of people who participated in “No Kings” rallies: | 7 million |
| Number of people who get their healthcare insurance through the ACA: | 24 million |
| Number of people who receive SNAP benefits: | 42 million |
Of course President Trump’s approval rating would decrease more over the SNAP issue than over the ACA or the “No Kings” rallies.
Nate continues by observing that Chuck Schumer is a poor Senate Minority Leader. I’ve heard Chuck Schumer speak in person. The amazing thing isn’t that he’s a poor Senate Minority Leader. It’s that he’s a senator at all.
As I predicted at the outset of the shutdown, it will end shortly after the election. My logic was simple. Has any opposition party ever received concessions following a government shutdown? Any benefit realized will have been realized in the election. The Democratic candidates won the elections they were expected to win plus, perhaps, a few seats in the Virginia state legislature. Time for the shutdown to end.
I don’t have any insider information on the operations of the Senate Democratic caucus but note that the senators “crossing the aisle” have nothing to lose. Is it statesmanship, conviction, or are they sacrificial lambs?
Nate’s Substack is one of the half dozen or so to which I’d subscribe if I had the jack which I don’t.
You predicted correctly. Since the shutdown seemed to benefit the Democrats at the polls, I’ll go ahead and make another prediction. Democrats will shut down the government again next October and it will run through the 2026 election.
The political skills to be an effective senate majority leader is different then a President or a senator.
Schumer had a 1600 SAT (the pre-reform score). He doesn’t have charm, but he is an effective tactician. And he seems reasonable in caucas management (which is actually the key skill in majority or minority leader). I question Schumer’s long term strategic thinking, due to being an instigator in heating the judicial wars by filibustering court of appeals nominees that resulted with the nuclear option for nominations and a conservative supermajority in the supreme court, a foreseeable (if somewhat remote) risk 20 years ago.
Proof positive that high SAT scores don’t mean much.
IMO the shutdown only made sense making certain assumptions that haven’t panned out and strictly from Chuck Schumer’s own personal political viewpoint.
This outcome indicates that either a) he’s a complete failure at caucus management or b) exactly what I said: he’s directing the outcome and pretending he isn’t.
I posted on the previous post of the shutdown on this. The scuttlebutt was Schumer knew how things would go (and are going); so that’s why he didn’t block a CR in March. But the Democratic party base was so riled up by that and everything Trump has done that Schumer was at risk of being primaried if he didn’t push a shutdown in October.
Is the willingness to sacrifice one’s political career for the long term goals of the party a prerequisite to being a good caucus leader; maybe…. I note McConnell and McCarthy faced the same delimma during Biden’s presidency and they chose to not go the “shutdown” route, but they did lose their jobs over that; in McCarthy’s case in a public spectacle.
There isn’t a good way to manage the shutdowns. Both sides try to blame each other. Usually not much changes. I suppose it’s possible that those who thought it was more the fault of the GOP voted for Dems and that’s why they won more votes than anticipated.
Steve