The Red Team Is Feeling Blue

The people came, they saw, and they voted. Veni, vidi... suffragium dedi. Ok, it was only in some states. And some people didn't actually go anywhere, other than the mailbox. But still...

Let's start with the two governor's races. First up, by virtue of a coin we just flipped, will be New Jersey. About a week ago, we wrote "Rep. Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) appears to be an unusually weak candidate." This was based on the polling of the race, which was very close (1-5 points), and on the fact that a few skeletons from her closet re-emerged during the campaign. Quite a few readers took deep offense to this. We're not sure why; it was an offhand comment, and surely folks don't think that three people who live in California, and one who lives in the Netherlands, have strong personal feelings about the next governor of New Jersey, right? Unless Bruce Springsteen runs, that is.

In any event, the polls got this race pretty wrong. With 95% of the vote counted, Sherrill is thrashing Jack Ciattarelli (R), 56.2% to 43.2%. That's a margin of 13 points. The various aggregators all had her average lead between 3.3 and 5.7 points, and there was no individual poll in the last two months that had her winning by 13. The only plausible way the pollsters could all be wrong by the same basic amount is that they guessed what the electorate would look like, and they guessed wrong. They likely had Democratic turnout up a bit and Republican turnout down a bit, and for at least one of those things, if not both, it was "a lot" not "a bit."

Lots of people are going to try to read the tea leaves here, and reach conclusions for what this all means for the next couple of elections. For now, we'll give some raw numbers, which readers can ponder for themselves. Our assessment will appear below, after we've also given the Virginia numbers. Just to make sure everyone is clear, "Next House" and "Next Senate" refer to the next midterm election, which is always 1 year after a New Jersey/Virginia gubernatorial election. "Next President" refers to the next presidential election, which is always 3 years after a New Jersey/Virginia gubernatorial election.

Year	Governor Result	Next House	Next Senate	Next President
2025	Dem. +13.0%; Dem Hold	?	?	?
2021	Dem. +3.2%; Dem. Hold	Rep. +9 seats; Flip	Dem. +1 seat; Dem. Hold	Rep. +1.5%; Flip
2017	Dem. +14.1%; Flip	Dem. +41 seats; Flip	Rep. +2 seats; Rep. Hold	Dem. +4.5%; Flip
2013	Rep. +22.1%; Rep. Hold	Rep. +13 seats; Rep. Hold	Rep. +9 seats; Flip	Rep. -2.1%; Flip
2009	Rep. +3.6%; Flip	Rep. +62 seats; Flip	Rep. +6 seats; Dem. Hold	Dem. +3.9%; Dem. Hold
2005	Dem. +10.5%; Dem. Hold	Dem. +31 seats; Flip	Dem. +5 seats; Flip	Dem. +7.2%; Flip
2001	Dem. +14.7%; Dem. Hold	Rep. +8 seats; Rep. Hold	Rep. +2 seats; Flip	Rep. +2.4%; Rep. Hold

The only other big thing on the New Jersey ballot yesterday was the state Assembly (the members of the state Senate were not up). As of midnight PT, 49 seats had been called for the Democrats and 19 for the Republicans, meaning the blue team will keep the trifecta in the Garden State. If the Democrats can pick up four or more of the 22 seats that have not yet been called, then they will extend their current 52-28 majority in the lower chamber.

It is certainly possible that, with the support shown by Democratic voters on Tuesday, Sherrill will try to join the parade of gerrymanderers once she takes office (not unlike Gov. Wes Moore, D-MD, did yesterday). If so, it's a steep hill to climb. Sherrill will take office in mid-January, and it would take a California-style rewrite of the state Constitution. There's also a waiting period of 20 days built into state law before such a thing can even be considered, and then there would have to be time to schedule and run a special election. Add it up, and even if Sherrill decides to try it, 2026 is a long shot because there just isn't time. Certainly, 2028 is possible, if the Democrats want to take a shot. The three districts currently occupied by Republicans are R+14, R+5 and EVEN, so picking up two seats is very doable.

Moving on to Virginia, Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA) dispatched her opponent, Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears (R-VA) by a margin similar to the one in New Jersey—57.5% to 42.3%, or 15.2 points (with 96.5% reporting). Here, the polls were a bit closer to the bullseye; the aggregators had Spanberger's average margin between 9.2% and 10.7%. Still, that means that the average miss was about 5.5%, which is outside the margin of error, and means that the pollsters here also whiffed a bit. Again, they presumably underestimated Democratic turnout, or overestimated Republican turnout, or both.

Here are the numbers we listed above, except this time with the Virginia gubernatorial results from the 21st century. Virginia is generally considered to be more predictive than New Jersey, first because it is closer to Washington, DC, and second because its rule against governors serving consecutive terms means that incumbency is not affecting the results:

Year	Governor Result	Next House	Next Senate	Next President
2025	Dem. +15.2%; Flip	?	?	?
2021	Rep. +1.9%; Flip	Rep. +9 seats; Flip	Dem. +1 seat; Dem. Hold	Rep. +1.5%; Flip
2017	Dem. +8.9%; Dem. Hold	Dem. +41 seats; Flip	Rep. +2 seats; Rep. Hold	Dem. +4.5%; Flip
2013	Dem. +2.5%; Flip	Rep. +13 seats; Rep. Hold	Rep. +9 seats; Flip	Rep. -2.1%; Flip
2009	Rep. +17.4%; Flip	Rep. +62 seats; Flip	Rep. +6 seats; Dem. Hold	Dem. +3.9%; Dem. Hold
2005	Dem. +5.7%; Dem. Hold	Dem. +31 seats; Flip	Dem. +5 seats; Flip	Dem. +7.2%; Flip
2001	Dem. +5.1%; Flip	Rep. +8 seats; Rep. Hold	Rep. +2 seats; Flip	Rep. +2.4%; Rep. Hold

Now that readers have had a chance to turn over the historical numbers from Virginia and New Jersey in their heads, we'll start with three observations:

1. We do not believe that results from these two states tell us too much about future presidential results. It's easy to gloss over a period of 3 years when creating a table or a spreadsheet, but it just doesn't work that way in reality.
   
   
2. We believe the biggest factor in the composition of the Senate is the map of whichever 33 (or so) seats happen to be up that year, a midterm-cycle map that is predominantly dictated by a presidential cycle 6 years previous. It is possible that results in these two off-year states give some insight into the Senate, but we don't see how you can isolate that from the effects of the map.
   
   
3. When it comes to predictive qualities, the 2002 election has to be tossed out. That one was super wonky due to the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.

If one accepts all of these statements as correct, that leaves us with House races outside of the 9/11 aftermath. And for those, the gubernatorial results do look to be reasonably predictive. If the Democrats do well in a gubernatorial race (say, winning by 5 points or more), they tend to do well in the next year's House elections. If the Democrats win by less than 5 in either of the two gubernatorial races, or if they lose, then they tend to do poorly in the next year's House elections. As a reminder, both Democratic gubernatorial candidates won by well more than 5 points last night.

Elsewhere in Virginia, it was a Democratic sweep. In fact, one could call it a Democratic wave. Ghazala Hashmi will take over as lieutenant governor; she also won by double digits, outperforming Republican John Reid by 11.4 points, 55.6% to 44.2%. Hashmi will become the first person of Asian descent, and the first Muslim, to hold statewide office in Virginia. This is not your grandparents' Confederacy, folks.

And in the AG race, it turns out that AG-elect Jay Jones (D) didn't actually have that much reason to be nervous. The race was tight early in the evening, primarily because the votes from white, rural areas were counted first. However, Jones eventually pulled away, defeating incumbent Republican Jason Miyares by 6.6 points, 53.1% to 46.5%. Not quite as big a margin as for Jones' two new colleagues, but still a comfortable margin.

The really blue-wavy part of the Virginia election, even more so than the laughers for governor and lieutenant governor, was the elections for the legislature. As in New Jersey, the state Senate was not up, but the House of Delegates was. And there, the GOP really took it in the teeth. The Democrats flipped 13 seats (with one still left to be called), giving them a majority of at least 64-35.

So, the blue team will have the trifecta in the Old Dominion State. And there, gerrymandering games will definitely be played. It doesn't actually matter which party the governor is from, because they don't get a say. However, it is necessary for rules that would allow the change to be approved by two consecutive sessions of the legislature. Virginia Democrats already took care of the first part of that, and when the new session begins in January, they will do it again. Currently, five of the state's eleven representatives are Republicans; their districts are R+22, R+12, R+6, R+3 and EVEN. So, it should be a simple matter to set the Democrats up to win three of those seats without taking too much of a risk.

And now, the New York mayoral election, where a whole lot of people tried desperately to salvage the campaign and the career of "independent" candidate Andrew Cuomo. That includes Cuomo himself, of course, along with current mayor Eric Adams, Donald Trump, a bunch of New York City fat-cats, and a whole bunch of New York Republicans (and some non-New York Republicans) who portrayed Zohran Mamdani as basically the next coming of Satan, except worse. None of it worked; Mamdani won the election comfortably, taking 50.4% of the vote to 41.6% for Cuomo and 7.1% for Republican Curtis Sliwa. Obviously, that means that even if all the Sliwa voters had migrated to Cuomo (something they were clearly not interested in actually doing), it wouldn't have changed the outcome.

It certainly appears that Mamdani will instantly become the highest-profile mayor of the city since Rudy Giuliani. For progressive and progressive-leaning Democrats, he will become a major standard-bearer, alongside another lefty New Yorker, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY). For some Jewish Democrats, he will be viewed as the embodiment of left-wing antisemitism (fairly or not). For many on the right, he will become the face of the Democratic Party, a symbol of the alleged excesses of the left. It is probable that city council members in Little Rock, and state representatives in Tennessee, and wannabe members of the U.S. House from Ohio and wannabe U.S. Senators from Georgia will build a portion of their campaigns around opposition to Mamdani, despite the fact that the mayor of New York has no impact on places outside of New York. And maybe this will work. On one hand, Republicans had some success doing this with Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). On the other hand, it's worked much less well with AOC. And obviously, if Mamdani performs well, it will be at least a little harder to use him to tar and feather the other members of the blue team.

There was one other interesting mayoral election, which we haven't written about, but we really should have. In Minneapolis, incumbent mayor Jacob Frey, a moderate liberal, is reasonably popular. He is running for reelection, and is opposed by a whole bunch of candidates, three of which formed a de facto alliance meant to leverage the city's ranked-choice system. State Senator Omar Fateh is a Democratic socialist, pastor DeWayne Davis is a centrist liberal, and entrepreneur Jazz Hampton is about halfway between those two, and each has been campaigning on the notion that I should be your #1 choice, and the other two should be choices #2 and #3. As of last night, with 95%+ of the votes counted, Frey had 41.7%, Fateh had 31.6%, Davis had 13.9% and Hampton had 10.4%. Frey is pretty close to the promised land, but once the city works through the ranked choices, it is at least possible that one of the other Democrats (presumably Fateh) could overtake him.

There were six other major cities, besides New York and Minneapolis, that held mayoral elections yesterday, and it was a sweep for the Democrats (or, in some cases, the Democrats who had to pretend to be nonpartisan). In Cincinnati, incumbent Aftab Pureval (NP, but really D) won by 54.4 points. In Atlanta, incumbent Andre Dickens (NP, but really D) won by 78.9 points. In Detroit, Mary Sheffield (NP, but really D) won by 54.4 points. In Pittsburgh, Corey O'Connor (D) won by 75 points. In Buffalo, Sean Ryan (D) won by 49.3 points. And in Jersey City, the top five finishers were all Democrats pretending to be nonpartisan. The top two, Councilman James Solomon (29%) and former governor Jim McGreevey (25.4%), will advance to a runoff. Obviously, large cities tend to skew very Democratic, but even allowing for that, these are some very large margins.

There were a few other notable elections for office that took place yesterday. In Pennsylvania, as expected, all three judges up for retention got the exact same result. Clearly, as we noted, people were not actually voting on the judges' performance, they were voting for or against the (D) next to their names. That thrice-repeated result was yet another laugher, with each judge being retained 61% to 39%. In Minnesota, as expected, one of the vacant state Senate seats was won by a Democrat-Farmer-Laborer, the other by a Republican. In both cases, the result was 62% for the winner, 32% for the loser. This means the DFL will retain control of the state Senate by one seat (the party also has the governorship; the state House is split evenly between D's and R's). Finally, in Texas, Democrats Christian Menefee (29.4%) and Amanda Edwards (25.7%) advanced to a runoff election that will fill TX-18, the very blue seat that was left open by the death of Rep. Sylvester Turner (D-TX). The date of the runoff has yet to be set, but you can bet Gov. Greg Abbott (R-TX) will push it back as far as he can.

As to the ballot propositions, the biggie, namely California's Prop. 50, passed in a rout. With 70.6% reporting, it's leading 63.8% to 36.2%. That's 27.6 points, and depending on how the remaining ballots break (and they are disproportionately from blue counties), it could end up closer to 30 points. So, California will probably send half a dozen or so Republican members of the House into retirement, partly blunting the effects of the shenanigans in Texas. In fact, because California has much more margin for error than Texas, it could be that California ends up expanding its Democratic delegation, and... so does Texas. With the narrow margins the Texans have left themselves, and with a possible backlash against the party in power in Washington, the circumstances may be ripe for a Lone Star gerrymander to turn into a Lone Star dummymander.

This is obviously a huge, huge win for Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA). Even if you think the guy's a phony and a political chameleon (and many people think both things about him), Democratic voters in 2028 are going to be looking for a candidate who will stand up to the Republicans and who will be able to get things done. What happened yesterday is clear-cut proof-of-concept for both things.

At the same time, the overwhelming win for Prop. 50 is a big poke in the eye for Donald Trump. He tried to get involved in the effort to defeat it, and eventually had the good sense to realize he was doing more harm than good, given how unpopular he is in the Golden State. Still, his pulling back didn't matter much. As we have written, the "Yes on Prop. 50" campaign morphed into the "Stick it to Donald Trump" campaign. And if there is any doubt on that point, CBS did an exit poll where they asked "Yes on 50" voters to identify the reasons they voted yes. Here are the results (obviously, respondents could vote for more than one):

To Oppose Donald Trump: 75%
To Oppose National Republicans: 70%
To Support National Democrats: 62%
To Support Gavin Newsom: 41%

It really couldn't be much clearer than that.

A quick rundown of what happened with the other propositions and initiatives we discussed yesterday:

• Maine, Question 1: By a huge margin, 63.9% to 36.1%, the Down Easters decided not to make it harder to vote. Good for you, Maine!
  
  
• Maine, Question 2: By a similar margin, 63.2% to 36.8%, Maine judges were given the power to take away guns from individuals believed to be dangerous. This one will end up before the U.S. Supreme Court, one of these days.
  
  
• Texas, Prop. 3: Texans decided to make it harder for judges to grant bail, 62%-38%.
  
  
• Texas, Prop. 15: Texans also gave parents more power to "make decisions concerning the child's upbringing," 70% to 30%. This is going to make life harder for teachers and school administrators.
  
  
• Texas, Prop. 16: Texans put their (boot-covered) feet down, and said that undocumented immigrants cannot vote in their state, 72% to 28%. This was already illegal, of course.
  
  
• Colorado, Prop. MM: Coloradans voted, 58.1% to 41.9%, to keep giving free lunches to all of the state's schoolkids, with people making over $300,000 paying more taxes (technically, getting fewer deductions) in order to cover the costs.
  
  
• Olympia, Washington, Prop. 1: The effort to raise the minimum wage there to $20/hour and to adopt a Worker's Bill of Rights, failed 55% to 45%. Fewer than 7,000 people voted, by the way.
  
  
• New York City, Props. 2, 3 and 4: 57%/58% of NYC residents decided they like the idea of making it easier for developers to build more housing. Given that those same pinkos just elected Zohran Mamdani, expect to see Stalinkas and Khrushchevkas lining the streets of New York in short order.
  
  
• New York City, Prop. 6: On the other hand, folks in the Big Apple apparently like to be the star of the show in off years, because 53% of them voted against moving municipal elections to even years.

And that's the skinny. Democrats nationwide have to be thrilled with these results; today, they'll be upgrading their iced brown sugar oatmilk shaken espressos from demi to tall, or maybe they'll just have a second mimosa with their lunch. The Party may be pulling terrible approval ratings right now, but however unpopular they might be, Donald Trump and the Republicans are clearly much more unpopular. Not only did the blue team pull off a near sweep (excepting a state Senate seat in Minnesota and a few not-too-important ballot props), but their wins were convincing. That is going to inform a lot of political maneuvering in the next 6-12 months. (Z)

Shutdown Politics: The Readership Speaks

Today, we reach a couple of inflection points when it comes to the federal government shutdown. First, by the time you read this, it will be the longest shutdown in American history, at 36 days and counting. It is true that is less impressive than it sounds, since they did not shut the government down prior to the 1970s. Still, Donald Trump has been in office for both of the two-longest shutdowns. Depending on your perspective, he is either doing something very right or very wrong.

The other inflection point, of course, is yesterday's elections. Certainly, the strong Democratic performance is going to stiffen the resolve of members of the blue team, some of whom might have been wavering. At the same time, what happened yesterday surely has to make some Republicans nervous. Not the one who most matters, we would guess, but some of them. Maybe even enough to start hammering out some sort of subsidy-saving, recission-proof compromise.

A couple of weeks ago, we surveyed the readership, to get their views on the shutdown and how it will unfold. As part of that, we also got close to a thousand comments. We thought that today would be an ideal day to share the full results, and some of the comments. We launched the survey on Monday, Oct. 20, and a couple of days later, we shared this one piece of the results, of when the readership thinks this is likely to finally end:

Timeframe	Readers Predicting
By the end of this week	0.5%
By the end of this month	6.3%
In the first 2 weeks of November	33.3%
In the last 2 weeks of November	35.9%
Sometime in December	14.7%
Not until 2026	9.3%

As you can see, 6.8% of respondents have already missed the mark, and another 33.3% have to be getting nervous. Here is a selection of comments from readers who think they can see the light at the end of the tunnel, even if that light might be a little dim right now:

W.R. in Henderson, NV, writes: Trump will move quickly after the elections in Virginia and New Jersey, plus the mayoral race in New York City. The Republicans will lose significantly and from Trump on down to Congressional leadership and membership, they will feel the pain and want to end the shutdown as soon as possible.

---

F.I. from Philadelphia, PA, writes: I'm assuming that the shutdown won't be over before Election Day. To that end, it's not unreasonable to assume that the combination of the approval of California's Prop 50, the retention of the judges in Pennsylvania, and the victories of Zohran Mamdani and Abigail Spanberger, will give the blue team more motivation to stick to their guns here.

---

B.F. in Madison, WI, writes: I think momentum swings to the Democrats when people start seeing how Obamacare premium increases will personally affect them. The combination of interfering with Thanksgiving travel and a disruption to Black Friday sales will be what finally forces MAGA to cave.

---

S.A.K. in Karnataka, India, writes: With someone like Trump in office, all bets are off. Having said that, I think the straw that will break the camel's back will be the fear of millions of peoples' travel plans over Thanksgiving going awry. If that comes to pass it would be all over the news and very hard to explain away.

---

C.B. in Burnsville, MN, writes: Thanksgiving travel will be the next major affects-lots-of-likely-voters event, and so is my pick for when one side will cave. Which one? Got me...

---

N.C. in Los Altos CA, writes: Everyone's going to come out looking bad. The real fight's over recissions. Those are key to OMB Director Russell Vought's plans, and he'll keep noting how much power they give Trump every time they meet. My guess is we'll see a compromise just before Thanksgiving where some recissions are made subject to filibusters, but not all, and then Trump will gleefully wave his magic Sharpie and defund nearly every Democrat priority except Obamacare.

---

E.D. in Tempe, AZ, writes: I project that, to end the shutdown, it will take the disrupted Thanksgiving travel in the rear view mirror, and the ensuing pressure from their constituents to bring the Republicans to the negotiation table, who are otherwise enjoying the reduced spending during the shutdown, and the pokes in the eyes that they believe they are giving to the Democrats.

---

C.B. in California, MD, writes: Not until people are unable to buy Christmas presents and this hits the retail sector hard and in a noticeable way will this shutdown end. Hungry kids won't do it. Airplane crashes won't do it. Only poor sales will do it.

We also asked readers to speculate as to how long the shutdown would last. The site we used for surveys added a little twist we didn't know about, but with a little math, the average prediction could be teased out of the numbers, and it was 43 days. If "the wisdom of the crowds" is correct, then that would mean an end to the shutdown on December 1. We also asked if this would become the longest shutdown on record (again, we were already at the 20 day mark, so the record was 15 days away). 86.2% of readers correctly guessed the record would be broken.

Here are a few comments from folks who don't quite see a light at the end of the tunnel (or who think there IS no light):

J.B. in Clarksville, TN, writes: I'm a soldier stationed at Fort Campbell, KY. Politically, I lean left...ish, unlike many of my fellow service members, who tend to be more conservative and largely supported Trump. I believe the real breaking point in this government shutdown will come when troops stop receiving pay.

While many of my peers may not feel the urgency now, I wonder how their views might shift once paychecks are missed. At that point, I expect a flood of angry letters and phone calls to their Congressmen and Senators—not just from servicemembers, but from their families and friends as well. Military retirees and those relying on VA benefits will also add to the pressure.

Eventually, the chorus of voices demanding an end to the shutdown will grow too loud to ignore. I suspect Republicans MIGHT be forced to offer concessions to Democrats just to bring it to a close. Though that is heavily dependent on who is blamed, overall, for the shutdown.

---

K.M. in Centennial, CO, writes: The shutdown will end when Trump gets involved. He will not wiggle until the threat of Jeffrey Epstein has passed, meaning until a sizable number of Republicans have removed their support for the pending release of Epstein documents.

---

C.R. in St. Louis, MO, writes: Trump's inability to stay on message ("Squirrel!") will undermine his messaging while the drum continues to beat. The Democrats have no rational reason to believe Trump will abide by any compromises. He will use recission to negate any "win" the Democrats get. I don't see how this ends soon unless Republicans cave on the recission language. The good news is that recission isn't overly popular with Senators on either side.

---

D.M. in McLean, VA, writes: This won't end until Trump's supporters feel it directly. As many of them are receiving ACA coverage, it will get real for them when they see their 2026 premiums. The condition many Republicans suffer from, a distinct lack of empathy, won't shield them when the effects are personal.

---

C.J. in Des Moines, IA, writes: It'll only end when Trump arrests all the elected Democrats.

---

C.J. in Beacon, NY, writes: This just doesn't seem like any previous shutdown. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has too much at stake to let the House re-open. Trump seems to "find" money for the things he deems important. I don't see this ending any time soon.

---

V.R. in Surprise, AZ, writes: This will be the longest shutdown ever because that is what Trump wants. He thrives on being cruel to others, especially when it's not his base. He showed us what he thinks of over half of Americans with that AI poo-poo video. When will the other half wake up and when will the media actually care to report?

---

B.C. in Norristown, PA, writes: This shutdown will not end until Trump is out of office. He clearly doesn't need Congress to govern; he does it all via executive orders and threats. Insofar as people not getting paid, how much has he ever been shown to care about that? We're in this for the long haul.

---

J.G. in Managua, Nicaragua, writes: Things are looking bleak from here in one of the countries which may be targeted as one of the "distractions," like Venezuela and Colombia. If Vought and Stephen Miller have their way the shutdown will never end. A permanent state of emergency will be declared and the transition to authoritarianism will be complete.

---

S.D. in York, England, UK, writes: My "how long" in days was 1,188. Which is the number of days until the January 20, 2029 inauguration. Hard to see a shutdown not being the ONLY campaign issue at that point.

The next question we asked was: "Donald Trump's average approval rating right now, per CNN, is 41%. What will it be on the day the shutdown ends?" The average guess was 37.4%. Not a question that we know the correct answer to as yet, but we can report that his average approval in the CNN aggregate is now down to 40%.

Here are a few reader comments specifically about Trump and his fellow Republicans:

S.O.S. in Madison, WI, writes: When in doubt, the dotard will chicken out.

---

W.B. in Iowa City, IA, writes: The shutdown is being made part of the plan—it will be purposefully drawn out in the hopes that people will get desperate and violent. That will be the excuse needed to put more troops into "cities being burned to the ground." It will also be an excuse to dissolve Congress—since it clearly can't get anything done—and extend the Unitary Executive theory of government. Trump will take credit for reopening the government, and he will require people to praise him for his firm, decisive leadership.

---

S.B.J. in Albany, NY, writes: The moment the Republicans think the shutdown is hurting them, they will pull out the "nuclear option" and pass the CR with a simple majority. The message will be that Republicans found a way to stop Democrats from keeping the shutdown going. Trump will see a slight improvement in polling numbers as a result.

---

R.T. San Marcos, TX, writes: There is no good outcome for Trump—either he caves on the Obamacare subsidies and the Democrats get some of the credit. Or, he "wins" and the Obamacare subsidies are non-existent and a lot of people are very upset. And, then, there is the discharge petition...

---

W.M. in Livonia, MI, writes: Personally, I'm rooting for natural causes to end the shutdown any day now.

---

J.P. in Chicago, IL, writes: It seems like the house of cards is so entangled that it will come down together: Shutdown, BBB, Epstein, tariffs. Trump will have the right, left and center unified against him.

---

Anonymous in Aliquippa, PA, writes: If the subsidies are not renewed, the concept of "early retirement" (i.e., leaving the workforce voluntarily before the traditional retirement age of 65 when Medicare kicks in) will become a fantasy concept for the middle class, and Republicans will pay a severe price in the 2026 midterms as a result.

---

E.H. in Chula Vista, CA, writes: I've noticed that the online trolling by pro-Trump people has significantly declined. Which either means there are a lot fewer of them now, or it's no longer fun to do it anymore.

The last question we asked was: "What will the Democrats get at the end of the shutdown?" Here are those numbers:

Result	Readers Predicting
Two or more major concessions (e.g., extended Obamacare subsidies AND some sort of ban on recission)	17.4%
One major concession (e.g., extended Obamacare subsidies)	48.5%
A promise from Republicans to discuss the Democrats' issues, but no actual concessions	23.1%
Nothing, not even a promise to discuss the Democrats' issues	11%

And here are some reader comments on the Democrats' side of this:

J.B. in Roseville, MN, writes: With the turn out from No Kings, I hope this gives the Democrats the spine to keep the shutdown going. The only way they will win is if they give some token concession so Trump can pretend he got a win from this. I also hope our country survives, or maybe Minnesota will just join Canada, eh?

---

T.C. in Whittier, CA, writes: Trump clearly thinks he's invincible right now, so the Democratic leadership will need spines of steel to bring him to heel. I have my doubts, however, about Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and their resolve. I can't shake this feeling that the Congressional Democrats aren't playing the same game as Trump and therefore don't know what the rules are and therefore how to beat him. I do think that some of the governors do get it (Newsom and J.B. Pritzker, D-IL), but not so much the D.C. Democratic leadership.

---

Anonymous in Las Vegas, NV, writes: This is one of the most important moments in American history. Health care is by far my most important issue, and why I vote Democratic almost every election regardless of candidate. I am PROUD of the Democrats for fighting for this, I always felt Barack Obama and especially Joe Biden were not strong enough with the power they had, I enthusiastically voted for Sen Bernie Sanders (I-VT) because his whole life his focus has been health care for all. My father was a clinical psychologist who helped people, yet he could never have health care because of a preexisting condition (Crohn's Disease). Every time he went to the hospital for surgery it bankrupted him. This is a DOCTOR we are talking about.

---

Q.M. in Manville, NJ, writes: The Democrats need to up their messaging game, because as far as I can tell, the only thing they're currently trying is my patience.

---

D.R. in Dublin, Ireland, writes: The Democrats upping their comms game is crucial: posting all the time, using short-format attention-grabbing platforms (TikTok, Instagram, etc.) to reach the disengaged, as well as traditional media, town halls etc.

---

T.A.H. in Santa Monica, CA, writes: The Democrats need to hold on and show they can fight. No one trusts a quitter. They need to remember that Trump's main appeal is his apparent forcefulness. Can Schumer grow enough of a spine to last? Who knows.

---

R.H. in San Antonio, TX, writes: In the end Democrats will get subsidies restored, but likely rescinded down the road. Even with that, it's a win for Democrats in terms of mood and messaging for the midterms. To be clear, I don't believe mood and messaging is their goal (actually helping people is) but it's the price Republicans will pay.

---

Anonymous in Lincoln, MT, writes: I think the Democrats have chosen this as the hill to die on and they are right to do it. They won't surrender.

---

A.R. in Austin, TX, writes: I gotta say, I'm mighty proud of the way that Democrats took an awful hand and have done a pretty decent job of sticking together and raising awareness of the issues of the expiring ACA subsidies, and are apparently (at least according to the polling that I've seen) not taking any of the blame. I dare say that Schumer learned his lesson from the previous budget expiration and is doing his best to make amends with the base. This is what we've wanted to see all along!

---

Anonymous in Middletown, NY, writes: I agree with everyone who has said Democrats should add "and release all the Epstein files!" to their demands. What have they got to lose?

Let us add a few reminders that the effects of the shutdown are already very real for some people:

P.D. in Lanham, MD, writes: A lengthy shutdown will be the final straw that tips the economy over into a recession. I know someone who is waiting to start collecting on her ex-husband's federal pension, which will not be processed until after the shutdown ends. In the meantime, she's homeless (except she is sleeping in my living room, and I'm feeding her).

---

Anonymous in Lexington, KY, writes: My Fed-employee next-door neighbor was fired by the DOGEs mistakenly, brought back, and is now suffering under the shutdown. So sorry for him, his wife, and their 4-year-old son. I marched for them and will feed them if they need it.

---

X.B. in Silver Spring, MD, writes: Many of my neighbors are federal employees or contractors. About half are looking for new jobs. Literally none believe this ends quickly or well.

---

L.G.F. in Poulsbo, WA, writes: My husband has been working without pay. He was offered the early retirement option and accepted. On April 30, they told him he could not retire early, as he was a needed worker. Around October 7, he could no longer get into his e-mail. Then his computer access card quit working. He went to talk to IT but they could not help him because the computer said he had retired. He had to send an e-mail on his home e-mail to one person back east to try and get it resolved. As of October 20, it has not been resolved. All of his training records have vanished. He got a notice that they would be cashing out his sick pay and, if he is still working, he would be in debt for however much money he was paid and his sick leave would be gone. Meanwhile, the people who could fix this are furloughed and the one guy back east is not responding to his e-mails. My husband has to go in and cannot take time off except pre-approved time off or sick leave. Only the best people!

---

L.R.H. in Oakland, CA, writes: I'm already seeing Bluesky posts about outrageous ACA premium increases. I hope everyone is aware that the BBB and the Republicans are responsible.

We heard from many readers who pointed out the system is broken:

D.W. in Ann Arbor, MI, writes: It shocks me that our government even operates this way, with budgets that "expire." We should have a standard federal budget, say a monthly one, and of course Congress should set it and have the authority to change it, but no action should mean no change, not a shutdown.

---

A.S. in Potsdam, Germany, writes: In the short term, tools like government shutdowns or filibusters of votes are a means of curbing Republican power. In the long term, however, they are extremely dangerous. The 60% hurdle for the budget blocks or slows down EVERY government. These blockades thus undermine the esteem and support of Congress, the democratically elected body, and enable approval for rule-ignoring autocrats or fascists like Trump.

I live in Germany. My grandfather, who came of age in the 1930s, described his impression at the time as follows: "We thought of Parliament as a talking shop, and the traditional parties and politicians as windbags. But Hitler did something, he took action and brought about change. That impressed us."

Parliament had squandered its reputation among the population through self-imposed blockades, and Hitler was able to build on that.

---

R.M. in Elgin, IL, writes: You know things are bad when lasting peace in Gaza is more likely than funding the Federal government. The problem with the recissions is that they destroy the trust needed to reach compromise. I think that the way this shutdown ends is another carve-out on the filibuster, which will turn it into a toothless option.

---

Anonymous in Finland, writes: The U.S. system is crazy. You do not have the greatest democracy in the world.

---

D.G. in Sarasota, FL, writes: This is not the way to run a country, really, is what don't they get about it.

---

G.R. in Carol Stream, IL, writes: This is not negotiation. This is a breakdown of the system.

---

M.M. in San Diego, CA, writes: No wonder everyone hates Congress.

And finally, a couple of closing thoughts:

Anonymous in Warren, MI, writes: This is bullsh**.

---

E.E.M. in Richmond, VT, writes: 3.2 more years of this bullsh**.

Thanks to everyone who contributed. Today's an unusual day; we'll be back to more normal order tomorrow. (Z)

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger