"Standing Up to Trump Didn't Work...so I took the money and decided to get out of politics" FTFY
this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2025
551 points (97.6% liked)
politics
26420 readers
2444 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
Nothing says "journalism" like repeating the content of a televised interview and getting the name of Maine's governor wrong.
Unfit for office.
I've heard this argument that the deal they got wasn't going to get any better in a few places. What are the counter arguments to that?
Because it was working, trumps numbers are down a bit, the election losses. But those didn't phase the Republicans at all seemingly. I personally think they still should have held out, but I don't have any logic for my stance. Is there any?
Their corporate overlords (amazon mostly I bet) were going to start losing money from the holiday air shipping and travel closures so they called up Schumer and told him to rap it up.
Schumer voted no. I'm looking for real reasons that won't get me laughed out of the room for being uninformed.
Schumer was in on it and voted no because he wanted the plausible deniability because he knows he's in hot water for all his previous collaborationist deals. The yes voters are loyal sacrificial patsies who (all but one I think) aren't up for reelection. It's backfired on him because one of the patsies chickened out while being grilled on camera and blabbed on him. That's the consensus.
As to why now, yeah I'm pretty sure the air traffic closures were going to inconvenience their corporate donors.
load more comments
(14 replies)
Caving to Trump, though, works just great -- for Trump and GOP, Certainly not for amyone else, such as theUS public,
And giving him what he wants will. Goodbye and good riddance you braindead meatbags
What the fuck is with this article? All over the place. Horrible read. Two relevant paragraphs.
Eight Senate Democrats caved to Donald Trump and voted to approve a budget deal with Republicans to end the government shutdown, angering their colleagues in Congress as well as their own party’s base.
These eight senators, including independent Angus King who caucuses with the party, are all either retiring or up for reelection years from now. They likely feel that they won’t have to pay an electoral cost for failing to stand up for Democrats’ goal of extending health care subsidies, instead settling for a future vote on the matter.
The full list of these Democrats is below:
Senator Richard Durbin (Illinois, retiring) Senator Angus King (Maine, term ends in 2030) Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (Nevada, term ends in 2028) Senator Jacky Rosen (Nevada, term ends in 2030) Senator Maggie Hassan (New Hampshire, term ends in 2028) Senator Jeanne Shaheen (New Hampshire, retiring) Senator John Fetterman (Pennsylvania, 2028) Senator Tim Kaine (Virginia, 2030)
load more comments
(1 replies)
He has to go. POS.
While King does caucus with Democrats, he isn’t an explicit member of the party anymore and hasn’t been since the 90’s
These traitors need to be removed from office.
Fucking christ, I hate Neoliberals