Schumer & Jefferies already caving on "No Masks"

[bigtree]

44. haven't they done this?

"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."

Both leaders have presented a comprehensive set of concerns with as much emphasis on the dangers and expectations of constitutionality as anyone - more so, in fact, because they are out there everyday repeating these things.

To be fair to them, like you said, they didn't make masks the centerpiece of their objections, didn't lead with it, and have basically just made the effort to respond to what they recognize as the republicans' disingenuous complaints they're trying to draw a line on, and making clear the things their demands are being demagogued about.

They have presented a broad set of demands that have said volumes about "completely unaccountable, violent, untrained, unidentifiable federal agents roaming the streets injuring people, killing people, and violating people’s Constitutional rights on a daily basis."

Are we really supposed to judge their 'political skills,' say, on whether they're able to prevent people from demagoguing their efforts, and getting people to parrot that sophistry?

I mean, what is the value of the efforts they make on their own initiative? Efforts that people opportunistically ignore in their rush to dump on them?

The both communicate regularly to the press, even today, and they couldn't have been more clear and comprehensive.

here:

and, here:

...we complain all of the time about their politics, but what is the actual value to anything to present what they've proposed as caving to anything?

What do critics achieve by representing reasonable reforms, presented in a clear, comprehensive fashion by a minority party to the republican majority (inherently a compromise action) so falsely, and without regard for any of the other provisions discussed at length by both leaders?

What is the actual political value in that to anything other than disrupting their effort? Where's the political genius in all of that? What's the end game?

What do we get out of that effort, because I'm here wondering a few things:

Who do people believe is influenced by the Democratic leaders?

Is the expectation that they spark republican voters or republican legislators, because we've seen actual movement away from republicans, and it's really something to imagine Schumer or Jeffries is going to persuade republicans to do something they've already told Dem leaders they agree to in private, but are too afraid to cross Trump or their own republican leadership.

As far as their political chops, lets remind ourselves of their actual role. They are there at the pleasure of the Democratic membership that voted for them as leaders. 99.9% of the time they represent the collective will of those elected Democrats.

When they don't agree with the majority of Democrats we know about it, like on the first shutdown vote. But both leaders have actually been batting 100%, as they have here in getting unified Democratic support for this set of important demands that will save lives, not just make a political point made moot by the republican majority.

The impetus behind all of the derision looks to assume the leaders are either dictators; adverse to the majority of Democrats; control the trolls and clickbaiters like HuffPo, or are presenting unreasonable demands.

None of that applies here. Both leaders have presented a comprehensive set of demands and have exceeded in their efforts to communicate those. In that light, you have to wonder about the efforts to muddle all of their correct and responsible advocacy being represented as 'holding someone accountable.'

For what? People's own projections? Hell, the saving grace for me here is that you normally can't find this internet nonsense anywhere among the adults are actually working to advance our ideals and initiatives.

And where is the evidence that they can't communicate our values? It's not in the polling which shows continued decline in republican support, and increasing support for Democratic candidates. It's not in the polling on the issues.

Are we to assume all of that support happened in some vacuum, and that our leaders have nothing to do with it? We're actually having this debate because THEY engaged everyone in it, along with the rest of the party - and no one can credibly argue the public hasn't gotten the message.

Makes no sense to me for that not to be attributed to their efforts, especially if there's an effort to denigrate them for something or the other.

We're in very good political shape, and all we need is an election to transform that into a party that operates as Democrats always do in the majority. This isn't about their communication skills, which have been on point and have moved the political debate toward our positions on this, and on other issues like health care and affordability.

This is about their ability to attract enough republican votes to achieve something. In this case, we should all agree that legislative effort is vital, and that not achieving changes to the ICE and DHS bill - not getting any agreements on their conduct and activity - would represent a failure on the behalf of those who would potentially benefit from those with their very lives and livelihoods.

Instead some want to continue this disingenuous debate over what is essentially misinformation about masks - from one goddamn reporter who got it wrong. The fact that anyone thinks this is the point they were making isn't their fault at all.

If people really wanted to explore the details of what they've said, those are as readily available as these clickbait reports that seek to divide the party from what our leaders are actually doing and saying.

I mean, here we have the momentum, and a comprehensive set of demands of the republican majority, and the best some can do is promote their own antipathies to the Dem leaders who organized it all; not the republicans who are the actual obstacles; but against Democrats who are correct in their urgent demands.

The politics directed against our own party here is pathetic. Is this really how to advance minority demands against a republican majority - by denigrating the party with the correct and vital proposals based on sophistry from a clickbait article?

What are we doing here? Where is the actual support for what the party has decided to demand, and why does it need to come with this dragging on our leaders?

Where's the political sense in that?

All of this space and air about Democrats, and virtually zero opposition or demands on republicans defending the indefensible.