On its face, the likely beginning of the path to end the longest government shutdown in U.S. history is a major Democratic capitulation.
Most congressional Democrats were against the deal that eight of the senators, who caucus with them, crossed the aisle to vote and re-open the government.
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren called the move a "terrible mistake"; Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut said it was indefensible; Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, declared it a "policy and political disaster."
And there were far harsher things said about the deal on social media across the political spectrum of people left of center, not just the most progressive.
Make no mistake: bridging the divide is going to be a significant challenge. But despite the intense blowback, the result in the end might not be all that bad for Democrats in next year's midterm elections.
Consider that affordability was the dominant issue in the off-year elections, where Democrats won sweeping victories. If it's the most important issue next year — and it very likely will be — then Democrats will likely retain the advantage.
What's more, if Republicans do vote against health care subsidy extensions in December — when a promised vote is to take place as part of this shutdown deal — then the GOP will fully own the increased health care costs that come with it.
Democrats could also look like the adults who took the high road, recognizing the very real pain that a lot of people were beginning to feel when President Trump and his administration were beginning to turn the screws on the most vulnerable.
So, Democrats' biggest challenge heading into next year's midterms may be keeping progressives on their side — and fired up to vote — after what many of them are viewing as the latest show of weakness from a party, as they see it, defined by that weakness.
A Democratic vise
Democrats put themselves in a very difficult position from the very beginning of this fight. Any acute observer could have seen this coming — and realize Democrats had nothing but bad options.
Republicans dug in, figuring at least enough Democrats couldn't handle the pain of millions losing Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, benefits as well as federal worker furloughs and layoffs.
And they were right.
"Most of us up here have voted repeatedly with the Democratic strategy," Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine said. "But after 40 days, it wasn't going to work."
It's hard to "win" a fight when one side broadly cares about whether the government is open and working properly and the other thinks government is the problem.
For Kaine and the seven others who crossed over to join most Republicans in voting to end the shutdown, a commitment to hold a vote to extend health care subsidies combined with the protections for federal workers and SNAP benefits, was enough.
"I don't think much of anything has been accomplished for the last 40 days except a lot of chaos and a lot of upheaval," said Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., who voted repeatedly to end the shutdown.
Sen. Angus King, an independent from Maine, who caucuses with the Democrats, is one of the three Democrats who has also been voting to end the shutdown, said bluntly: "It wasn't working. It's been six weeks. Republicans made it clear they weren't going to discuss the health care issue, Affordable Care Act tax credits, until the shutdown was over."
"Waiting another week, or another month, wouldn't deliver a better outcome," New Hampshire Sen. Jeanne Shaheen said. "It would only mean more harm for families in New Hampshire and all across the country."
Not everyone agrees with that reasoning, including swing-state Sen. Elissa Slotkin from Michigan.
"I always said it's got to do something concrete on health care," she said of an agreement to re-open the government. "And it's hard to see how that happened."
Leadership problems
Democratic leaders also were ostensibly against the deal to reopen the government.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer voted no, though there are questions about whether Schumer allowed the senators, who went ahead with the votes, to do so.
None of the senators, who came out in favor of the shutdown deal, are in imminent political jeopardy, given they're not facing reelection next year, and two of them are retiring.
"The overwhelming majority of Senate Democrats, led by Leader Schumer, are opposing this bill in the Senate," House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said Monday.
He pointed out that the Trump administration's actions when it comes to federal workers leaves most Democrats "deeply skeptical" of their "intentions." And on health care, Republicans, he noted, have not acted in "good faith," given that it's the party that tried to repeal the Affordable Care Act dozens of times.
"It doesn't change the core problem here," Jeffries said of the shutdown deal. "We need to decisively address the Republican health care crisis on behalf of working-class Americans, everyday Americans and middle-class Americans."
But Schumer already faced significant pushback when he abandoned the fight in March and voted to keep the government open. And given the party's movement toward ousting older leaders, the shutdown deal could spell trouble for the 74-year-old New Yorker as a party leader, even if he didn't vote for it.
A changing party – from pragmatism to pugilism in the age of Trump
Schumer is certainly not representative of how the Democratic Party is changing. And the moderates, who signed onto this deal, also very much represent the old guard of the party.
For as much that's made of how much the GOP has changed since Trump came into office — and it has been a lot — the Democrats have changed as well.
Democrats have moved from pragmatism to pugilism. As an example of that, in April of 2017, just after Trump began his first term, an NBC poll found that 6-in-10 Democrats favored making compromises with Trump to gain consensus on legislation.
But that has completely flipped. As of March of this year, the last time there was a threat of a shutdown, two-thirds of Democrats said they think Democrats in Congress should instead stick to their positions even if this means not getting things done in Washington.
Not every progressive sees what happened as a total disaster for the left. Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo, who is generally a pretty pragmatic progressive, sees a silver lining. He described the deal as "embarrassing," but sees progress for the left:
“[T]here’s a difference between the deal itself and where the deal leaves Democrats and the broader anti-Trump opposition. This deal shows us that Democrats still don’t have the caucus they need for this fight that will be going on at least through this decade. But the shutdown also accomplished a lot. And not withstanding the WTF fumble at the 10-yard line, it’s still a dramatically different caucus than we had in March. … Democratic voters need to keep demanding more, keep up the pressure and keep purging the Senate caucus of senators who are not up to the new reality.”
He also points out that if this deal goes through, there will be another funding deadline at the end of January. At that point, if Democrats don't extract health care extensions or anything else of consequence, there will be another opportunity for leverage.
Over the next year, there will also likely be primaries from the left and expect the shutdown positioning to be a litmus test for those primaries – and for 2028.
In the meantime, Democratic officials are banking on voters having a short-term memory, that with time, progressives will take a victory in the progress they've made in moving the party to a more fighting stance – and the issue landscape will propel them to winning next year.
And winning cures a lot of divisions.
Copyright 2025 NPR
