Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

EarlG

(23,475 posts)
37. Got it
Thu Feb 5, 2026, 06:17 PM
17 hrs ago

and I don’t disagree with you on that part. They are legislators, which means they can’t just write a law that says “NO MASKS” because of all the necessary legitimate exceptions that are going to crop up — and also because they’re not in charge of Congress so they can’t write a law on this anyway. As you say, they’re in a negotiation.

So as usual this is a case of Democratic leaders being bad at politics. Instead of focusing on masks, they should be going much harder on the bigger picture — completely unaccountable, violent, untrained, unidentifiable federal agents roaming the streets injuring people, killing people, and violating people’s Constitutional rights on a daily basis. Really, that should be the only message. Everything else is just details.

At the same time though, were they focusing on masks? That perception has been reinforced by the Huff Post’s negative framing and clickbait headline. I’m pretty sure that Schumer and Jeffries didn’t plan to make this all about masks — they have a lot of other items on the agenda, and all of them are in strong opposition to the current regime’s policies. For example, one of the items is that law enforcement should have to show identification. But people have leaned into the spin and used it to bash Schumer and Jeffries as weak, spineless, cowards, carrying water for Republicans, etc., which I think is unfair.

I guess ultimately I see a difference between someone being a bad politician and someone being a bad person. I think Schumer and Jeffries are as disgusted as we are at the current situation, and I think they are serious about wanting to do something about it — they’re not up there blowing us off and saying that no reforms are necessary.

Unfortunately, their political skills are not up to scratch, which lets us all down — especially with an assist from Huff Post. But if that’s the case, I’m not sure that tearing them down further — for this at least — is helpful.

I hope that makes sense. Thanks for your thoughts.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

You have details on that? MineralMan 23 hrs ago #1
Gone from "no masks" to "no masks except when..." mr715 23 hrs ago #10
No mention of the rest of their positions, eh? MineralMan 23 hrs ago #11
Posted it right there in the title. Did you miss it? mr715 23 hrs ago #12
Of Course, It's Not a "Full Retreat" Why So Negative on our Dems? Cha 18 hrs ago #35
House leadership Cirsium 23 hrs ago #13
How is it caving if it wasn't on the table? leftstreet 23 hrs ago #2
They originally said "No masks" now Cattledog 23 hrs ago #3
Oh. I never saw that in their statements n/t leftstreet 23 hrs ago #6
leadership's position now Cirsium 23 hrs ago #14
Sen. Schumer said today bigtree 18 hrs ago #28
That isn't the issue Cirsium 17 hrs ago #36
no, what you're saying isn't the issue here bigtree 17 hrs ago #39
Thanks Cirsium 16 hrs ago #42
Yet another anti-Schumer & Jefferies thread MorbidButterflyTat 23 hrs ago #4
Schumer and Jeffries are fine politicians leftstreet 23 hrs ago #8
Capriciousness? Cirsium 22 hrs ago #15
Anti-Schumer & Jeffries Knee-jerk Syndrome. betsuni 22 hrs ago #16
We can't seem to win Just_Vote_Dem 22 hrs ago #17
Again and again, Democrats do what people say they want. Then it's not what they want. betsuni 22 hrs ago #20
Keep normalizing the indefensible mr715 22 hrs ago #18
Keep what, now? betsuni 22 hrs ago #22
poster looks to be advocating 'defending the indefensible' bigtree 19 hrs ago #25
Quick question... EarlG 18 hrs ago #31
They should be required to identify themselves. mr715 18 hrs ago #32
From this, my understanding is EarlG 18 hrs ago #33
That I am not Schumer or Jeffries mr715 18 hrs ago #34
Got it EarlG 17 hrs ago #37
This is a perfect articulation of my thoughts on this. mr715 17 hrs ago #38
Thanks EarlG 16 hrs ago #43
I Appreciate your thoughts on Clarifying What Huff Past Cha 17 hrs ago #40
haven't they done this? bigtree 16 hrs ago #44
I think everything you say has value EarlG 15 hrs ago #46
betsuni Isn't "normalizing" Anything, nt Cha 12 hrs ago #47
The correct context is: Masks. Ice wearing masks. Duncan Grant 22 hrs ago #21
... orangecrush 23 hrs ago #5
LINK? justaprogressive 23 hrs ago #7
Quick search, but from yesterday. Maybe something changed. mr715 23 hrs ago #9
really poor journalism in that Huffpo clickbait bigtree 19 hrs ago #26
They're insisting on changing how ICE dresses Bobstandard 22 hrs ago #19
You do realize there are circumstances in which other groups wear masks? EdmondDantes_ 21 hrs ago #23
ICE conducts racist "hunts". They're not police. Duncan Grant 20 hrs ago #24
Post removed Post removed 19 hrs ago #27
How is anyone surprised? AltairIV 18 hrs ago #29
you're drafting all of that derision over sophistry bigtree 18 hrs ago #30
Cattledog, What are your thoughts on what Sen Chris Murphy has to say.? Cha 17 hrs ago #41
They have to absolutely be strong on this one. It's insane that they wear masks, among many other seriously big issues themaguffin 16 hrs ago #45
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Schumer & Jefferies alrea...»Reply #37