Two Observations on This Week's Festivities

There’s long been speculation that a number of Senators who are hiding their true views on hot-button issues for the base. These Senators may make public statements that indicate certain, probably more progressive, views, but in reality they don’t want to take the votes to back up those views. So, Schumer addresses this issue by making sure that nobody has to take a “hard” vote when it will damage them.

If you look at who voted for cloture, note that only retirees and probable retirees (Durbin) who are up in 2026 took the vote. Note, too, that everyone but King and Shaeen tried the too-clever-by-half trick of voting for cloture and voting against the CR itself.

Were these the only Dems who were inclined to vote for cloture? We’ll never know, because a good number of Senators obviously believe that lying to their constituents to avoid criticism is a valid strategy. Schumer only needed 7 and a couple extra so nobody looked like the “deciding” vote, as if that was something that people care about. My guess is that if he had needed more, he would have gotten more.

At least one of these votes was a surprise: Schatz. There’s a guy who talks a good progressive game on social media. But, in reality, he either believed that he was taking the right vote, or he got something for that vote. He’s pretty junior (first elected in 2012), and he’s young (52), so maybe he got a promise of some leadership position out of it. What’s for sure is that he stayed very, very quiet, voted for cloture, then issued a statement that wasn’t persuasive (to me, at least). Note that his statement wasn’t part of his press page, because he wants this vote to go away.

Maybe I’m sounding a bit like a conspiracy theorist, but where are we as a party when our electeds hide their votes from us because they know we’d object, then after they vote they issue a statement that we know is bullshit? The ease at which Schumer told his lies about the vote makes me think it’s something he and his colleagues do a lot.

Schatz seems like a well-liked Senator in Hawaii, and he delivers for his constituents, so probably he thought this vote would be a nothing, certainly not an issue in his 2028 race, since who knows what will happen by then. I don’t blame any politician in Hawaii for not announcing a primary challenge tomorrow, just as I don’t expect a smart politician like AOC to announce a primary against Schumer until after 2026, if ever.

But let’s consider Durbin, who’s probably retiring anyway. If I were a credible candidate in Illinois thinking about taking a run at that seat, I’d announce my primary challenge tomorrow. You’d get a bunch of small-dollar donations, but, more importantly, you’d get a shit ton of free media. Every mainstream political show would want to interview you, especially if you were a feisty fighter who went hard at Durbin and his history of inaction. The “resistance” media, or whatever we’re calling it nowadays, would have you on all their podcasts.

Our party has a problem getting its message out. But a tough-talking challenger who had a strong anti-Musk, anti-Trump message would get a lot more attention than, say, Elizabeth Warren (I’m sad to say). They’d be a new shiny object. Unfortunately the Democratic fetish for hierarchy and people taking their turn would probably mean that no Illinois Democrat with a real chance at beating Durbin would step up. Still, I think it’s a hell of an opportunity for someone to show that they’re a risk-taker, which is what we so sorely need in this party.