Republicans and Dems let the gov't shut down on 09/30/25, then what?

Doesn’t that make them hypocrites?

No. Because shutting down the government to save medical care for poor people is better than shutting it down to slash the government.

Don’t they lose the moral high ground the next time the Republicans want to shut down the government the next time they want to take on a political stance?

No. Because shutting down the government to save medical care for poor people is moral.

Won’t this divide the country even more as it comes across as, “It’s different for us. When you want to shut down the government your reasons are invalid and you are worse than Hitler. But when we want to do it, we are totally in the right and we are saving our country.”?

It shouldn’t. Because shutting down the government to save medical care for poor people is in fact needed to save the country.

Enough with the both sides do it. Details matter. Democrats are fighting to save everyone. Republicans are fighting to destroy people they don’t like.

Democrats aren’t shutting down the government. Republicans control both houses of congress and the presidency.

The republicans have wanted to shut down the government to have a real conversation about the debt ceiling? When did this happen?

Longtime fed employee here. I sure wish they would shut things down during a shutdown. But they don’t. So this is always just such a stupid exercise.

No, I’m not saying the Dems should cave. Just saying it sure would be nice to have adults running things.

I believe it takes 60 votes to pass a CR in the Senate, and there are 53 Republicans in the Senate…

It only takes 51 votes to change the rules.

What have they offered the Democrats in exchange for their support?

More pain.

Do you know how many Republican Senators voted for the CR that passed the House? It wasn’t 53. In fact, it was only 44 (two GOP Senators voted against it, Fetterman voted Yea, and I guess a few couldn’t be bothered to show up to vote). Cite: H.R. 5371: Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2026 -- GovTrack.us

If the GOP wants to pass their bill without any Democratic votes (or perhaps just with Fetterman), then they should change the filibuster rules. If they don’t want to do that, they should try to negotiate, just like Democrats did when they had small majorities. From what I’m reading, all Democrats are asking is to include the ACA tax subsidy extension. Which, if we are going to use the “extending current law doesn’t actually increase the deficit” accounting method that the GOP used for the reconciliation bill should be a zero-cost change.

So we’re still doing the “It’s the Democrats fault the Republicans can’t govern!” thing. Same ol’ schtick, two weeks later, and not a valid excuse why.

If the ACA tax subsidy goes away the R’s just want to be able to say “It wasn’t ALL our fault. The D’s signed off on it too”

If the budget bill spends money how Democrats want it to be spent, they should vote for it. If it doesn’t spend money how they want, they shouldn’t. It’s as simple as that. If Republicans don’t want to pass a budget bill that Democrats like, well, they have the majority. They can pass whatever bill they want.

Here’s a real discussion about the debt ceiling: It’s ludicrous to pretend that it exists. There are some things that the government shouldn’t do, and some things it isn’t allowed to do, and some things that the government can’t do. One of the things the government can’t do is change the laws of arithmetic. Congress sets the government’s income, and Congress sets the government’s expenses, and whatever the difference is, that’s the debt. The debt is always authorized by Congress, because it’s always the difference between those two other numbers that Congress sets.

Agreed, but as long as it does shouldn’t we act like it exists for a reason and is not just an inconvenient 5 minute vote?

No, we shouldn’t do anything as long as it does exist, because it doesn’t exist. Acting like it exists for a reason would be pretending that it exists, which as I just explained, is ludicrous.

Then let’s debate it, decide it is a worthless figleaf and repeal it. That way we don’t have to deal with it every couple of years.

But it’s not worthless to Republicans. They can use it to make Democrats look bad and they can ignore it when it inconveniences them. They will never face consequences for being filthy hypocrites about it. So why not keep it and continue using it as a blunt object?

The headline running here is:

Wow! As much as that! Crikey!
What a marvelous way of normalising disfunction.

How frequently does this occur with other models of government?
We almost had a government shutdown here almost 50 years ago.
Gough got turfed and then lost the election in a landslide.
Never came close before or since.

Next up we’ll have a failed New York property developer defaulting on the US sovereign debt. Biggly.

I reckon it’s time to write suitably forceful emails, with pleas on behalf of those who won’t get paid this time around. Though my employer mostly focuses on federal contracts, some of us are indeed lucky to have our jobs for now. I’ve got real tears for those who’ll get strapped for cash.

Of course the Republicans are lying, claiming the Democrats are demanding health care for “illegal aliens”. The Democrats are demanding no such thing, but the Republican base will swallow whatever garbage their party feeds them. To JD Vance, a proper sentence includes a noun, a verb, and “illegal aliens”.