Adrian
@adrianwashere.bsky.social
You think, absent the shutdown, zero RIFs before February?
November 11, 2025 at 9:34 AM
You think, absent the shutdown, zero RIFs before February?
RIF ban isn't worthless to those who would've been RIF'd w/o it.
I think the main benefit of all this is probably informational, which, not ideal, but I don't think Dems could get much substantive.
How much suffering should Dems have allowed GOP to inflict to prove a better deal wasn't obtainable?
I think the main benefit of all this is probably informational, which, not ideal, but I don't think Dems could get much substantive.
How much suffering should Dems have allowed GOP to inflict to prove a better deal wasn't obtainable?
Dems proved how much the GOP hates America(ns) & is willing to:
-Make insurance unaffordable
-Go to court for the right to starve ppl
-Let USG workers go w/o pay for 40 days
-Voluntarily wreck air travel
You assume GOP would relent. Did Dems need to prove GOP wouldn't do that, either? How long?
-Make insurance unaffordable
-Go to court for the right to starve ppl
-Let USG workers go w/o pay for 40 days
-Voluntarily wreck air travel
You assume GOP would relent. Did Dems need to prove GOP wouldn't do that, either? How long?
November 11, 2025 at 8:51 AM
RIF ban isn't worthless to those who would've been RIF'd w/o it.
I think the main benefit of all this is probably informational, which, not ideal, but I don't think Dems could get much substantive.
How much suffering should Dems have allowed GOP to inflict to prove a better deal wasn't obtainable?
I think the main benefit of all this is probably informational, which, not ideal, but I don't think Dems could get much substantive.
How much suffering should Dems have allowed GOP to inflict to prove a better deal wasn't obtainable?
You're off by several orders of magnitude ("a few thousand federal employees") but I'm the bot?
November 11, 2025 at 7:38 AM
You're off by several orders of magnitude ("a few thousand federal employees") but I'm the bot?
Getting RIF'd workers reinstated, & criminalizing future RIFs *is* reining in this admin. I'd love for more, but 2024 voters elected a GOP trifecta.
If CR deal is accepted, House reconvenes & swears in Grijalva, & there's still another fight in January, but w/o GOP having SNAP & RIFs as leverage.
If CR deal is accepted, House reconvenes & swears in Grijalva, & there's still another fight in January, but w/o GOP having SNAP & RIFs as leverage.
November 11, 2025 at 7:21 AM
Well, that, but they're also not trying to starve insurers bc they're giving insurers tax breaks. bsky.app/profile/john...
The administration is “giving breaks to giant private equity firms, crypto companies, foreign real estate investors, insurance providers and a variety of multinational corporations.”
www.nytimes.com/2025/11/08/b...
www.nytimes.com/2025/11/08/b...
How the Trump Administration Is Giving Even More Tax Breaks to the Wealthy
www.nytimes.com
November 11, 2025 at 5:11 AM
Well, that, but they're also not trying to starve insurers bc they're giving insurers tax breaks. bsky.app/profile/john...
MTG wasn't blaming Republicans before the shutdown.
Red states weren't backing down over redistricting before the shutdown.
Just bc they didn't get the exact results you think they should have gotten, in the exact way you think they should have gotten them, doesn't make it a failure.
Red states weren't backing down over redistricting before the shutdown.
Just bc they didn't get the exact results you think they should have gotten, in the exact way you think they should have gotten them, doesn't make it a failure.
November 11, 2025 at 4:47 AM
MTG wasn't blaming Republicans before the shutdown.
Red states weren't backing down over redistricting before the shutdown.
Just bc they didn't get the exact results you think they should have gotten, in the exact way you think they should have gotten them, doesn't make it a failure.
Red states weren't backing down over redistricting before the shutdown.
Just bc they didn't get the exact results you think they should have gotten, in the exact way you think they should have gotten them, doesn't make it a failure.
RIFs were illegal, but not criminal.
The SNAP case forced them to pay November benefits from the emergency fund. It didn't fund SNAP for an entire year.
And yes, there was political pressure over ACA before, but now there's more pressure, backed by election results.
The SNAP case forced them to pay November benefits from the emergency fund. It didn't fund SNAP for an entire year.
And yes, there was political pressure over ACA before, but now there's more pressure, backed by election results.
November 11, 2025 at 4:47 AM
RIFs were illegal, but not criminal.
The SNAP case forced them to pay November benefits from the emergency fund. It didn't fund SNAP for an entire year.
And yes, there was political pressure over ACA before, but now there's more pressure, backed by election results.
The SNAP case forced them to pay November benefits from the emergency fund. It didn't fund SNAP for an entire year.
And yes, there was political pressure over ACA before, but now there's more pressure, backed by election results.
How long should Dems have let the shutdown go on so that you, personally, would be convinced it was pointless to continue?
If Thanksgiving came & went w workers unpaid, SNAP exhausted, air travel chaos, would you have been convinced? Christmas?
Once the point is made, the suffering is gratuitous.
If Thanksgiving came & went w workers unpaid, SNAP exhausted, air travel chaos, would you have been convinced? Christmas?
Once the point is made, the suffering is gratuitous.
November 11, 2025 at 4:34 AM
How long should Dems have let the shutdown go on so that you, personally, would be convinced it was pointless to continue?
If Thanksgiving came & went w workers unpaid, SNAP exhausted, air travel chaos, would you have been convinced? Christmas?
Once the point is made, the suffering is gratuitous.
If Thanksgiving came & went w workers unpaid, SNAP exhausted, air travel chaos, would you have been convinced? Christmas?
Once the point is made, the suffering is gratuitous.
His *political appointees* are willing to break the law. That doesn't mean *career bureaucrats* are.
Why do you think Pirro & Halligan are personally prosecuting cases? Bc careerists are just going along? Why are they asking JAGs to volunteer as immigration judges? Bc they have enough already?
Why do you think Pirro & Halligan are personally prosecuting cases? Bc careerists are just going along? Why are they asking JAGs to volunteer as immigration judges? Bc they have enough already?
November 11, 2025 at 4:19 AM
His *political appointees* are willing to break the law. That doesn't mean *career bureaucrats* are.
Why do you think Pirro & Halligan are personally prosecuting cases? Bc careerists are just going along? Why are they asking JAGs to volunteer as immigration judges? Bc they have enough already?
Why do you think Pirro & Halligan are personally prosecuting cases? Bc careerists are just going along? Why are they asking JAGs to volunteer as immigration judges? Bc they have enough already?
Exactly. The point was to make the case to the public that the GOP is willing to do these things, not to actually allow the GOP to do these things.
Hopefully Tuesday has Republicans worried & makes them more willing to bargain.
bsky.app/profile/adri...
Hopefully Tuesday has Republicans worried & makes them more willing to bargain.
bsky.app/profile/adri...
November 11, 2025 at 4:09 AM
Exactly. The point was to make the case to the public that the GOP is willing to do these things, not to actually allow the GOP to do these things.
Hopefully Tuesday has Republicans worried & makes them more willing to bargain.
bsky.app/profile/adri...
Hopefully Tuesday has Republicans worried & makes them more willing to bargain.
bsky.app/profile/adri...
The deal doesn't require them to hold a vote on it, political reality requires them to do something about it bc rates are exploding & they'll get destroyed in the midterms if they don't do anything. Is that a GOP win?
"Haha, we aren't bound by that deal, so watch us commit seppuku to own the libs!"
"Haha, we aren't bound by that deal, so watch us commit seppuku to own the libs!"
November 11, 2025 at 4:01 AM
The deal doesn't require them to hold a vote on it, political reality requires them to do something about it bc rates are exploding & they'll get destroyed in the midterms if they don't do anything. Is that a GOP win?
"Haha, we aren't bound by that deal, so watch us commit seppuku to own the libs!"
"Haha, we aren't bound by that deal, so watch us commit seppuku to own the libs!"
Can't cut off SNAP & hide behind a shutdown, or play games about whether a shutdown counts as an emergency, when it's fully funded.
This reinstates anyone RIF'd, plus strong protections.
The only part of the deal the House isn't bound by is the ACA vote, which they still have to deal w regardless.
This reinstates anyone RIF'd, plus strong protections.
The only part of the deal the House isn't bound by is the ACA vote, which they still have to deal w regardless.
November 11, 2025 at 4:01 AM
Can't cut off SNAP & hide behind a shutdown, or play games about whether a shutdown counts as an emergency, when it's fully funded.
This reinstates anyone RIF'd, plus strong protections.
The only part of the deal the House isn't bound by is the ACA vote, which they still have to deal w regardless.
This reinstates anyone RIF'd, plus strong protections.
The only part of the deal the House isn't bound by is the ACA vote, which they still have to deal w regardless.
If the GOP accepts the new CR deal, that's what they get.
If they reject it, they own the entire shutdown by themselves. Can't blame the Dem filibuster.
All the hungry children, unpaid workers, air travel chaos heading into Thanksgiving, then more of the same heading into Christmas. 100% GOP.
If they reject it, they own the entire shutdown by themselves. Can't blame the Dem filibuster.
All the hungry children, unpaid workers, air travel chaos heading into Thanksgiving, then more of the same heading into Christmas. 100% GOP.
November 11, 2025 at 3:48 AM
If the GOP accepts the new CR deal, that's what they get.
If they reject it, they own the entire shutdown by themselves. Can't blame the Dem filibuster.
All the hungry children, unpaid workers, air travel chaos heading into Thanksgiving, then more of the same heading into Christmas. 100% GOP.
If they reject it, they own the entire shutdown by themselves. Can't blame the Dem filibuster.
All the hungry children, unpaid workers, air travel chaos heading into Thanksgiving, then more of the same heading into Christmas. 100% GOP.
One of the main purposes of leadership (from either party) is to be a "sin eater" for the caucus.
Why do you think the Senate leaders are from SD & NY, & previously KY? Why are the House leaders from La. & NY, & previously SF, & a deep-red CA dist?
It's to safely draw fire to protect the caucus.
Why do you think the Senate leaders are from SD & NY, & previously KY? Why are the House leaders from La. & NY, & previously SF, & a deep-red CA dist?
It's to safely draw fire to protect the caucus.
November 11, 2025 at 3:33 AM
One of the main purposes of leadership (from either party) is to be a "sin eater" for the caucus.
Why do you think the Senate leaders are from SD & NY, & previously KY? Why are the House leaders from La. & NY, & previously SF, & a deep-red CA dist?
It's to safely draw fire to protect the caucus.
Why do you think the Senate leaders are from SD & NY, & previously KY? Why are the House leaders from La. & NY, & previously SF, & a deep-red CA dist?
It's to safely draw fire to protect the caucus.
Yes, awareness.
Do you think anyone is confused at this point about who is responsible for ACA insurance premiums skyrocketing? Fucking MTG is blaming Republicans, like a rat fleeing a sinking ship.
Elections have consequences. There's nothing Dems can do now to make 214 > 218 or 47 > 53.
Do you think anyone is confused at this point about who is responsible for ACA insurance premiums skyrocketing? Fucking MTG is blaming Republicans, like a rat fleeing a sinking ship.
Elections have consequences. There's nothing Dems can do now to make 214 > 218 or 47 > 53.
Dems proved how much the GOP hates America(ns) & is willing to:
-Make insurance unaffordable
-Go to court for the right to starve ppl
-Let USG workers go w/o pay for 40 days
-Voluntarily wreck air travel
You assume GOP would relent. Did Dems need to prove GOP wouldn't do that, either? How long?
-Make insurance unaffordable
-Go to court for the right to starve ppl
-Let USG workers go w/o pay for 40 days
-Voluntarily wreck air travel
You assume GOP would relent. Did Dems need to prove GOP wouldn't do that, either? How long?
November 11, 2025 at 3:13 AM
Yes, awareness.
Do you think anyone is confused at this point about who is responsible for ACA insurance premiums skyrocketing? Fucking MTG is blaming Republicans, like a rat fleeing a sinking ship.
Elections have consequences. There's nothing Dems can do now to make 214 > 218 or 47 > 53.
Do you think anyone is confused at this point about who is responsible for ACA insurance premiums skyrocketing? Fucking MTG is blaming Republicans, like a rat fleeing a sinking ship.
Elections have consequences. There's nothing Dems can do now to make 214 > 218 or 47 > 53.
SNAP & RIFs will no longer be on the table in January, making it easier for Dems to take a hard line.
ACA subsidies are still a live issue. Maybe Tuesday will have scared the GOP into giving in on that issue to try to salvage the midterms. If it's dead, starving kids wasn't going to save it.
ACA subsidies are still a live issue. Maybe Tuesday will have scared the GOP into giving in on that issue to try to salvage the midterms. If it's dead, starving kids wasn't going to save it.
November 11, 2025 at 3:08 AM
SNAP & RIFs will no longer be on the table in January, making it easier for Dems to take a hard line.
ACA subsidies are still a live issue. Maybe Tuesday will have scared the GOP into giving in on that issue to try to salvage the midterms. If it's dead, starving kids wasn't going to save it.
ACA subsidies are still a live issue. Maybe Tuesday will have scared the GOP into giving in on that issue to try to salvage the midterms. If it's dead, starving kids wasn't going to save it.
There is nothing Dems can do to make 214 > 218 or 47 > 53.
Whether the subsidies get renewed or not was not going to be determined by how many millions Dems allowed the GOP to force to suffer.
The best we can hope for is that Tuesday scares the GOP into renewing subsidies.
Whether the subsidies get renewed or not was not going to be determined by how many millions Dems allowed the GOP to force to suffer.
The best we can hope for is that Tuesday scares the GOP into renewing subsidies.
November 11, 2025 at 3:04 AM
There is nothing Dems can do to make 214 > 218 or 47 > 53.
Whether the subsidies get renewed or not was not going to be determined by how many millions Dems allowed the GOP to force to suffer.
The best we can hope for is that Tuesday scares the GOP into renewing subsidies.
Whether the subsidies get renewed or not was not going to be determined by how many millions Dems allowed the GOP to force to suffer.
The best we can hope for is that Tuesday scares the GOP into renewing subsidies.
The shutdown was not an opportunity to redo the 2024 elections. It was an object lesson in "elections have consequences."
There is nothing Dems can do to make 214 > 218, or 47 > 53. It's not possible. bsky.app/profile/adri...
There is nothing Dems can do to make 214 > 218, or 47 > 53. It's not possible. bsky.app/profile/adri...
Dems proved how much the GOP hates America(ns) & is willing to:
-Make insurance unaffordable
-Go to court for the right to starve ppl
-Let USG workers go w/o pay for 40 days
-Voluntarily wreck air travel
You assume GOP would relent. Did Dems need to prove GOP wouldn't do that, either? How long?
-Make insurance unaffordable
-Go to court for the right to starve ppl
-Let USG workers go w/o pay for 40 days
-Voluntarily wreck air travel
You assume GOP would relent. Did Dems need to prove GOP wouldn't do that, either? How long?
November 11, 2025 at 3:00 AM
The shutdown was not an opportunity to redo the 2024 elections. It was an object lesson in "elections have consequences."
There is nothing Dems can do to make 214 > 218, or 47 > 53. It's not possible. bsky.app/profile/adri...
There is nothing Dems can do to make 214 > 218, or 47 > 53. It's not possible. bsky.app/profile/adri...
Everyone is stressed right now, & I know she & I agree on the majority of things.
It's not ideal, but it's fine.
It's not ideal, but it's fine.
November 11, 2025 at 2:42 AM
Everyone is stressed right now, & I know she & I agree on the majority of things.
It's not ideal, but it's fine.
It's not ideal, but it's fine.
How many would need to suffer for how long to prove to you, personally, that the GOP can't be reasoned w?
The purpose of the shutdown was to demonstrate to the public the GOP's hatred & depravity, not to stand by & allow the GOP to engage in mass starvation, evictions, foreclosures, & bankruptcies.
The purpose of the shutdown was to demonstrate to the public the GOP's hatred & depravity, not to stand by & allow the GOP to engage in mass starvation, evictions, foreclosures, & bankruptcies.
November 11, 2025 at 2:38 AM
How many would need to suffer for how long to prove to you, personally, that the GOP can't be reasoned w?
The purpose of the shutdown was to demonstrate to the public the GOP's hatred & depravity, not to stand by & allow the GOP to engage in mass starvation, evictions, foreclosures, & bankruptcies.
The purpose of the shutdown was to demonstrate to the public the GOP's hatred & depravity, not to stand by & allow the GOP to engage in mass starvation, evictions, foreclosures, & bankruptcies.
Dems proved how much the GOP hates America(ns) & is willing to:
-Make insurance unaffordable
-Go to court for the right to starve ppl
-Let USG workers go w/o pay for 40 days
-Voluntarily wreck air travel
You assume GOP would relent. Did Dems need to prove GOP wouldn't do that, either? How long?
-Make insurance unaffordable
-Go to court for the right to starve ppl
-Let USG workers go w/o pay for 40 days
-Voluntarily wreck air travel
You assume GOP would relent. Did Dems need to prove GOP wouldn't do that, either? How long?
November 11, 2025 at 2:38 AM
Dems proved how much the GOP hates America(ns) & is willing to:
-Make insurance unaffordable
-Go to court for the right to starve ppl
-Let USG workers go w/o pay for 40 days
-Voluntarily wreck air travel
You assume GOP would relent. Did Dems need to prove GOP wouldn't do that, either? How long?
-Make insurance unaffordable
-Go to court for the right to starve ppl
-Let USG workers go w/o pay for 40 days
-Voluntarily wreck air travel
You assume GOP would relent. Did Dems need to prove GOP wouldn't do that, either? How long?
You're the one claiming these protections are meaningless, that Trump will just violate them. I'm asking you to explain how, in practice.
Either Trump has to personally do all these tasks, or convince bureaucrats to commit felonies, hope for pardons, & risk firings under the next admin.
Either Trump has to personally do all these tasks, or convince bureaucrats to commit felonies, hope for pardons, & risk firings under the next admin.
November 11, 2025 at 2:04 AM
You're the one claiming these protections are meaningless, that Trump will just violate them. I'm asking you to explain how, in practice.
Either Trump has to personally do all these tasks, or convince bureaucrats to commit felonies, hope for pardons, & risk firings under the next admin.
Either Trump has to personally do all these tasks, or convince bureaucrats to commit felonies, hope for pardons, & risk firings under the next admin.
There was never any way for Dems to make 214 > 218, or 47 >53. The time & place for getting majorities was Election Day a year ago. Now it's just harm reduction, which this is: bsky.app/profile/adri...
Dems negotiated such a terrible deal that the GOP now has no choice but to accept:
-Funding SNAP for a year
-Undoing past RIFs
-Criminalizing future RIFs
-Reconvening the House/swearing in Grijalva
-Repeating all this in January, but w/o SNAP & RIFs as leverage
-Higher ACA awareness
Is that it?
-Funding SNAP for a year
-Undoing past RIFs
-Criminalizing future RIFs
-Reconvening the House/swearing in Grijalva
-Repeating all this in January, but w/o SNAP & RIFs as leverage
-Higher ACA awareness
Is that it?
November 11, 2025 at 1:42 AM
There was never any way for Dems to make 214 > 218, or 47 >53. The time & place for getting majorities was Election Day a year ago. Now it's just harm reduction, which this is: bsky.app/profile/adri...
I mean, did Dems want 14 million kids to starve? Holidays to be wrecked? USG workers to be forced to quit to pay their bills? I think the points have been made in spades. ACA is still a live issue, but GOP went to court to fight to be allowed to starve ppl. What do Dems gain by letting them?
Dems negotiated such a terrible deal that the GOP now has no choice but to accept:
-Funding SNAP for a year
-Undoing past RIFs
-Criminalizing future RIFs
-Reconvening the House/swearing in Grijalva
-Repeating all this in January, but w/o SNAP & RIFs as leverage
-Higher ACA awareness
Is that it?
-Funding SNAP for a year
-Undoing past RIFs
-Criminalizing future RIFs
-Reconvening the House/swearing in Grijalva
-Repeating all this in January, but w/o SNAP & RIFs as leverage
-Higher ACA awareness
Is that it?
November 11, 2025 at 1:37 AM
I mean, did Dems want 14 million kids to starve? Holidays to be wrecked? USG workers to be forced to quit to pay their bills? I think the points have been made in spades. ACA is still a live issue, but GOP went to court to fight to be allowed to starve ppl. What do Dems gain by letting them?
I think this timing was much better:
-Can't hide DOGE in a shutdown
-Travel much bigger in Nov/Dec
-Coincides w EOFY2025
-Coincides w open enrollment
-Ppl more sympathetic to hunger near feast holidays
-ICE nonsense hi-viz
-Boost for elxns
-Lucky bonuses: East Wing demo, Gatsby party
-Can't hide DOGE in a shutdown
-Travel much bigger in Nov/Dec
-Coincides w EOFY2025
-Coincides w open enrollment
-Ppl more sympathetic to hunger near feast holidays
-ICE nonsense hi-viz
-Boost for elxns
-Lucky bonuses: East Wing demo, Gatsby party
Dems negotiated such a terrible deal that the GOP now has no choice but to accept:
-Funding SNAP for a year
-Undoing past RIFs
-Criminalizing future RIFs
-Reconvening the House/swearing in Grijalva
-Repeating all this in January, but w/o SNAP & RIFs as leverage
-Higher ACA awareness
Is that it?
-Funding SNAP for a year
-Undoing past RIFs
-Criminalizing future RIFs
-Reconvening the House/swearing in Grijalva
-Repeating all this in January, but w/o SNAP & RIFs as leverage
-Higher ACA awareness
Is that it?
November 11, 2025 at 1:33 AM
I think this timing was much better:
-Can't hide DOGE in a shutdown
-Travel much bigger in Nov/Dec
-Coincides w EOFY2025
-Coincides w open enrollment
-Ppl more sympathetic to hunger near feast holidays
-ICE nonsense hi-viz
-Boost for elxns
-Lucky bonuses: East Wing demo, Gatsby party
-Can't hide DOGE in a shutdown
-Travel much bigger in Nov/Dec
-Coincides w EOFY2025
-Coincides w open enrollment
-Ppl more sympathetic to hunger near feast holidays
-ICE nonsense hi-viz
-Boost for elxns
-Lucky bonuses: East Wing demo, Gatsby party