Subject: Re: Schumer's book tour postponed
I think perhaps it’s possible to do both. I’m not sure what the “busing migrant to blue cities” equivalent will be/could be/should be, but I disagree that you have to lay down, prostrate, and let the Republicans walk all over you.

Refusing to do something damaging to your party and your prospects in the next election isn't "laying down, prostrating, and letting the GOP walk all over you." It's avoiding something stupid. If the only alternative to doing something that makes you worse off is to do nothing, then you should do nothing. Yes, doing nothing leads to bad outcomes - but if the only alternative is worse, then doing nothing is the right call.

There was no endgame for voting down the CR. If they voted down the CR, they would have just had to approve the exact same thing within one to five weeks later. There's no leverage. The GOP would not have paid much of a price for the shutdown, Trump would have been much better off with the shutdown, and the Democrats would have been buried under the pressure of millions of people suffering during the shutdown. You don't gain leverage by saying "no" to something you basically want. Democrats want the government to run, they don't want Trump to keep chainsawing it - so shutting it down is the equivalent of Brer Bear and Fox throwing Brer Rabbit in the briar patch. It's something they can convince themselves is actually punishing to the rabbit, but it's really more what the rabbit wants and is bad for them.

Stewart is funny, but he's wrong - and Schumer's right. You fight back against the Republicans by engaging in politics that will make them less popular and more likely to lose their seats. And shutting down the government doesn't do that. The fact that there isn't an easy and high-visibility alternative to voting down the CR that would make them less popular doesn't change that - the absence of a good alternative doesn't make the self-damaging choice any less self-damaging.