Let’s Seize the Opportunity Created by the Senate Dems’ Capitulation (#108)

I’ve tried to be patient, but we must demand that the Senate Democrats elect new leadership before the January budget debate, I also share examples of the reforms we need (like ending the filibuster and reforming the Supreme Court), opening thoughts about attending the NWSL Championship game and a likely attempt to suppress a protest, and links to other stories I’m following.

Here we go. I’m glad you’re here.

Leading Off

I am so excited to have had the opportunity to join about 18,000 other people to witness the 2025 NWSL Championship Game in San Jose on Saturday night. Gotham FC won a tense 1-0 contest over the Washington Spirit with a goal from Rose Lavelle in the 80th minute.

One thing that is still bothering me: the teams’ supporters groups were planning to hold signs to support trans and intersex people at the 20th minute of the first half. But the in-stadium clock stopped working at 17:30. It kept working on the broadcast, though. The in-stadium clock started functioning again around 23:00.

No, I am not buying that this was a coincidence. As women’s sports become more popular, leadership in these leagues is trying to tamp down on players’ long-standing ties to political activism. NWSL Commissioner Jessica Berman has been

Regardless, the Washington Spirit supporters were not stopped by such a simplistic plan to thwart them. It was not as coordinated as it would have been, but the passion remains to support people who are being attacked by the present regime and people who are trying to join Riley Gaines on the lucrative right-wing funder circuit.

#1: Senate Democrats’ Too-Cute Surrender

Okay, I tried to be patient. I waited a few days after the government shutdown capitulation agreement to see if I was overreacting.

Nope. I don’t believe so. So, here goes: Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin need to step down from their leadership positions in time for new leaders to be in place for the January budget fight.

The negotiated solution that reopened the government was not a complete loss in policy terms. But it was another unforced political setback under the Schumer/Durbin leadership.

It demoralized the base. The resolution had nothing to do with the argument Democrats made to justify not providing the votes needed to bypass the Senate filibuster. The way the deal came together means that Schumer and Durbin either have lost control of the caucus or are trying to deceive Democratic voters about why they caved.

I’m betting it was deception. Regardless, it’s all unacceptable.

First, let’s give credit for the small bits of good news. Protecting SNAP recipients from being held hostage for the rest of this fiscal year was a win. Rolling back the Trump regime’s illegal layoffs of government civil servants—and getting Trump to sign a bill with strong language preventing another such attempt through January 30—is a small step towards re-establishing Congress’ control of the purse.

But there were opportunities for so much more, even if the Democrats’ health care demands were not possible. As the American Prospect’s David Dayen writes:

I share a lot of the frustrations expressed all over social media. But the biggest one for me comes on page 12 of the continuing resolution that advanced in the Senate last night. There, the drafters demonstrated that they have every ability to constrain Donald Trump and OMB director Russ Vought’s desires and stop the consolidation of executive power. But they only did it in one area, to grab one necessary vote for passage, not because they care about Congress’s relevance as an institution. That this Senate knows how to restore the power imbalance in Washington and chose not to is almost worse than completely ignoring it.

On the details, I do agree that the existing dynamics, particularly with air travel chaos and the Trump administration losing ruling after ruling on food assistance (including one just last night), were actually pushing Senate Republicans to bow to their president and eliminate the Senate filibuster, or at least create some semantic carve-out for government spending that would end the filibuster in all but name. The Cave Caucus was likely mindful that their power to dictate events is tied to the rule by minority in the Senate, and they stepped in front of that process like human shields.

I also thought Democrats were making a mistake by focusing only on health care. Yes, it is great that more attention was drawn to the Trump/Republican health care funding cuts. But then what? There was no chance that Republicans would agree to open the government on those terms.

One of the reasons so many voters felt betrayed by the deal was the lack of any effort to prepare people for a realistic outcome. After weeks of health care…health care…only health care, getting nothing more than a promise of a vote on that issue is impossible to score as a political win, even with the protections for SNAP and federal workers.

Worse, it appears the Democrats involved in the deal had another priority—preserving the filibuster. Senator Durbin inadvertently gave away the game when he said that the deal makes sense only to people who understand how the Senate works. Julie Roginsky explains:

But why? Why would Democratic senators say one thing in public and something completely different in private? Why is it in their interest to fold now, when the American people are so squarely behind them?

The answer will enrage you.

It’s the filibuster. Trump has been pushing senate Republicans to use the nuclear option and blow up the filibuster. And what Trump wants, Trump eventually gets from members of his party.

Chuck Schumer and this cabal of terrified Democrats were panicked that Republicans were finally going to take away their power to obstruct bad policy — so they preemptively took away their own power to obstruct bad policy.

Have you ever seen anything this feckless and gutless in your life?

They would not do this before last Tuesday’s election because they wanted to harness our rage at the Republicans to win seats — and then they turned that rage inward, because, as Durbin so aptly pointed out, the rest of us are too dumb to understand “how the senate works.”

In that, Durbin inadvertently gave up the game. He and the rest of his cohort must think they are protecting Democratic priorities by preserving the filibuster. They aren’t.

Oh, Senator Durbin, we do understand how the Senate works. We also understand how the filibuster rule has contributed so much to the decline—and potential failure—of our democracy.

Also, as long as we are discussing what we know about how the Senate works, it appears to me that more than eight members of the Senate Democratic Caucus wanted to surrender. But Schumer arranged it so that all eight joining the Republicans in voting to re-open the government are either retiring or not on the ballot again until 2028 or 2030.

What a coincidence! How convenient, indeed!

It is quite interesting how these coincidences always seem to happen when Senators talk about protecting the filibuster or otherwise screwing over their constituents. There are always just enough Senators willing to cast an unpopular vote with the base to protect colleagues who will soon face their voters.

But that’s just how the Senate works, right, Senator Durbin?

That’s enough for me. I do not want Schumer and Durbin to go into the January budget negotiations as the Senate’s Democratic leaders after what we experienced in March and this month.

What have they done to give us any hope that they can successfully push an agenda in negotiations? What have they done to give us any optimism that they will draw a line in the negotiations and not cross it when the regime acts out?

I mean, Schumer reportedly signed off on the phone data payout measure in the budget agreement that could give the eight Senators investigated for their involvement in Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election hundreds of thousands of dollars. That seems like more “how the Senate works” crap than a stirring defense of our democracy.

Replacing Schumer and Durbin requires someone in the Senate Democratic Caucus to step up and challenge them. Reports suggest that no one is considering doing so. That means constituents should try to prime the pump, if only to force a caucus conversation about developing a viable strategy for January.

I have been calling my Democratic Senators this week, asking them to find a new leader for the January budget negotiations. On days when it is challenging to figure out what we can do, making those phone calls is a small, tangible step.

We also need to prioritize ways to identify candidates who are not serious about reform or challenging the Trump regime in the upcoming election. Primary challenges are necessary to change the way our federal Democratic elected officials operate.

The Senate leadership situation is one of my red lines. Supporting Schumer and Durbin implies supporting the recent capitulation or the insider deal to allow Senators to avoid facing the voters too soon after going along with it. That type of going along is not what we need as we try to turn back the Trump regime’s attempt create a competitive autocracy.

But that’s just one question to ask. More on that in the next story.

Tabs I Closed

• Why Senate Democrats Really Caved (Julie Roginsky, Salty Politics, Link to Article)
• The Most Frustrating Thing About the Shutdown Cave (David Dayen, The American Prospect, Link to Article)
• The Secret Meeting That Ended the Shutdown (Lindsay Wise, Natalie Andrews, and Siobhan Hughes, The Wall Street Journal, Link to Article)
• Senators rage against phone data payout measure won by Thune (Hailey Fuchs and Jordain Carney, Politico, Link to Article)

#2: Change or Purge

What other questions can we ask federal candidates as we enter the 2026 primary election cycle to ensure they will take the steps needed to restore our Republic?

It is time to put candidates on the record. As Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall suggests, there are questions we can ask to determine whether they are all-in on the fight against Trumpism.

I’m looking to a half-dozen year or more time horizon in which almost all the current senators need to be convinced to take a dramatically different approach to politics or purged from the ranks of elected office. Let’s call it Change or Purge. To me, from March to now was a big step forward. The way of operating during this shutdown was very different from what happened in March. And the way it ended — here I know many disagree with me — doesn’t negate what happened during the last five weeks, either in terms of the changed behavior or what was accomplished. This is a multi-course treatment. The results of the first course were encouraging. So, on to the remaining nine.

Since I’ve focused on this Change or Purge framework in this post I’d like to flesh out some of what that means. Of course a lot of this is either characterological or a way of using power. That can be hard to capture in bullet points or outside the context of a specific political situation. But there are a series of things senators support or don’t support that gives a clear indication of whether they are serious about confronting the challenge of the moment or battling back from Trumpism.

Marshall suggests the following list as a starting point:

• Ending the filibuster. Democrats cannot pass the legislation that is necessary to restore our democracy and meet voters’ expectations for progress with the filibuster in place. It has to go. If a compromise is necessary, a talking filibuster with members present in the chamber would ensure adequate time for debate and for informing voters. As Marshall writes, “If you support keeping the filibuster you are not serious about moving the country forward in any positive direction.” We need promises from all candidates that they will end this historical accident now.
• Reforming the Supreme Court. The current court was corrupted by the theft of two seats during the first Trump term, thanks to the machinations of then Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. The Supreme Court has become an extension of the Republican Party, restricting presidential power under a Democratic president while pursuing the anti-Constitutional unitary executive theory under Trump. We need candidates willing to expand the court and add term limits. I would also like to see the next Democratic Congress aggressively exercise the powers the Constitution grants it to restrict the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction. Let’s start in key areas like reproductive rights, voting rights, and abolishing gerrymandering. The John Roberts Court may want to overreach and issue rulings based on Federalist Society vibes. We do not need to accept it. The exceptions clause of the Constitution (Article III, Section 2, Clause 2) gives Congress checks and balances options that are vital to restoring the rule of law. We should be skeptical of any candidate unwilling to support these reforms.
• Statehood. D.C. must be granted statehood as soon as possible, especially after the Trump/Miller regime’s anti-Constitutional use of federal power against its residents. Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories should be given the option of becoming states.
• Clearing the law books. Trump has demonstrated that we cannot continue to have processes that rely on the president acting in good faith. All of the statutes allowing a president to declare an emergency unilaterally need to be removed or changed. We have to weaken the presidency. Congress needs to exercise its Constitutional powers.

I would add to this list expanding the size of the House of Representatives to ensure each target district has a population equal to Wyoming’s. This “Wyoming Rule” would increase the size of the House from 435 to 575. (I would go further, because small districts would make gerrymandering more challenging and dilute the electoral college advantage small states receive from their two Senators.)

I have been thinking about additional reform ideas that Democrats should embrace, and I plan to start compiling them. I believe voters want the system to change significantly. That is one of the reasons I believe we have experienced Obama-Trump-Biden-Trump voters. People feel the system is failing them, and so they will vote for someone new until they see progress. So Democrats need to go big to restore trust in government.

I can no longer support a candidate, especially an incumbent, who is unwilling to support dramatic changes to the political and economic systems.

What reforms do you think are necessary? Restoring appropriate taxation to the rich? Health care reforms? I would love to know what you think, so I can add them to my list and discussions in this newsletter.

Tabs I Closed

• The Status Interview – Or How To Write Up a Senate Purge List (Josh Marshall, Talking Points Memo, Link to Article)
• Uncapping the House - Pt. 1 - The Wyoming Rule (The American Redistricting Project, Link to Article)

Other Stories I’m Following

• Trump ally Infantino to award first Fifa peace prize at World Cup draw in DC (Bruan Armen Graham, The Guardian, Link to Article)
  Other institutions may try to one-up FIFA for corruption, but the global soccer governing body is always ready to demonstrate how it is the real professional when it comes to cozying up to the worst people on the planet. FIFA President Gianni Infantino created this peace prize to hand out for the first time on December 5, 2025, during the Men’s World Cup draw in Washington, D.C. Infantino just happened to think of creating such an award after President Trump failed to win the Nobel Peace Prize (for so many obvious reasons). I do not think it is a coincidence that the FIFA peace prize will be awarded for the first time at an event President Trump is scheduled to attend. Soccer fans have come to expect such awful decisions from FIFA.
• Dick Cheney’s Long, Strange Goodbye (Susan Glasser, The New Yorker, Link to Article)
  Here’s a sentence I never thought I’d read: “I got a hug from Rachel Maddow at Dick Cheney’s funeral.” I get it. The former Vice President at least understood how dangerous the Trump regime could be. But he helped create the problem with his long-standing (since the Ford Administration) advocacy for the unitary executive theory. And we should not forget the war crimes he committed as Vice President.
• His Works Completed, Dick Cheney, Mass Murderer of Iraqis and American Democracy, Dies (Spencer Ackerman, The Nation, Link to Article)
  In case you need a reminder of the scope of those war crimes, and the hundreds of thousands (if not millions) who died because of Dick Cheney’s decisions, this obituary provides a good summary. Also, as Ackerman writes, “The successor presidencies of Democrats Barack Obama and Joe Biden decried the power grabs Cheney pursued but mostly pocketed his gains for their own purposes. (In his case for unrestricted bombing in the Caribbean and Pacific, [Trump Administration Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot] Gaiser cited Obama’s own marginalization of Congress to bomb Libya in 2011.) Trump now walks a red carpet of lawlessness, plutocracy, and bloodshed woven by Cheney. An uncharismatic Nixon functionary—someone who might never have risen to power had Texas Senator John Tower not drunk himself out of a Pentagon appointment that instead went to Cheney—decisively shaped the destruction of constitutional governance in 21st-century America.”
• You don’t have to forgive Marjorie Taylor Greene (Lyz Lenz, MS NOW, Link to Article)
  Speaking of recent political conversions, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s is one of the most interesting. One of the consistent throughlines in her career is being critical of institutions that defend abusers of children. That’s why she believed in Q-Anon. It’s why she’s been critical of the Catholic Church. And now it’s why she is outspoken about the Epstein Files. But there is a lot more in her record that we are not required to forget.
• Trump celebrates CBS News’ new leadership as “the greatest thing that’s happened in a long time to a free and open and good press” (Matt Gertz, Media Matters for America, Link to Article)
  Only if one’s definition of a “free and open press” is one that bends the knee to the Trump regime. Trump is running the Viktor Orbán playbook by using government power and his oligarch friends to ensure major media outlets are on his side. The next step will see Trump help the Ellison family’s Paramount Skydance take over CNN through a purchase of Warner Bros. Discovery.
• MLB's gambling crisis is only beginning (Molly Knight, The Long Game, Link to Article)
  The recent gambling crisis featuring two Cleveland Guardians pitchers who conspired with gamblers to let them bet on the predetermined outcome of one of their pitches won’t be the last one we see in baseball or other professional sports. Leagues and media outlets are tying themselves so closely to gambling that more and more scandals are inevitable.
• George Bell Served 24 Years in Prison for a Crime He Didn’t Commit. Now He’s Learning to Live Again. (Ryan D’Agostino, Esquire, Link to Article)
  No, money cannot buy back the time lost after being falsely accused and wrongfully convicted. Here is another story about police misconduct, a failure of the court system, and a person still facing judgment from people who don’t know the whole story.
• South Carolina Tried to Pass a Bill Jailing Women for Abortion. No Republican Voted Against It. (Mary Ziegler, Slate, Link to Article)
  As Zeigler explains, “The law would have subjected women who have abortions to prison sentences of up to 30 years; criminalized the act of providing information about how to get an abortion, even in another state; allowed family members to sue women who had abortions; and eliminated exceptions for rape and incest.” While the bill stalled, Ziegler is right to note that all of this is part of a process to mainstream these extreme positions through an incremental process.
• This Week in Abortion: 11/17/25-11/21/25 (Jessica Valenti, Abortion, Every Day, Link to Article)
  Republicans and their forced-birth allies have been getting more extreme, and not just in South Carolina. Valenti does an essential job with her team in keeping up with the rise of anti-abortion extremism, including new efforts to criminalize this healthcare procedure after years of denials from these forced-birth monsters.

Post-Game Comments

Today’s Thought from my Readwise collection:

“In 2014, Ursula Le Guin accepted the National Book Foundation’s Medal for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters, saying: “We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art, and very often in our art, the art of words.”—Adrienne Matei, Does Everything Feel Broken but Weirdly Normal? There’s a Word for That

Thank you for reading! This post is public, so feel free to share it.

Follow me on BlueSky to see the stories I’m finding and the tabs I’m opening in real-time.

Craig Cheslog (@craigcheslog.com)

GenXer against fascism. Talking politics, women’s soccer, WNBA, Manchester United men and women, USWNT, USMNT, Green Bay Packers, Boston Celtics, Chicago Cubs, and Taylor Swift. (he/him/his) My newsletter: https://thelongtwilightstruggle.com/.

Bluesky Social

The Long Twilight Struggle is free and supported voluntarily by its readers. If you liked what you read and can afford it, please consider becoming a paid subscriber! Or, if you prefer, feel free to buy me a coffee using the tip jar.