I really don’t care to defend Schumer, but posting this article as substantiated proof of him supporting Democrats capitulation is not really convincing. The article doesn’t mention what changed between it being widely assumed and it being a fact? Just starting a sentence with “in fact” doesn’t make it true. There are many other, more recent sources with his quotes saying he doesn’t approve of their actions.
It’s equally possible that Schumer has no control of the situation and the Senators who are voting for reopening the government know Schumer is spineless, and will only craft a strongly worded letter condemning their actions. The fact he went public with a proposal after reports of senators defecting isn’t proof he is complicit in their capitulation, just that he was unable to convince all the Democratic Senators that his plan was a good plan they should remain consistent about. Is Schumer responsible as the minority leader of the senate and ultimately to take the blame for the Democrats fracturing over this; yes. But to say he is secretly supporting the capitulation as if he’s Palpatine playing both sides is not really substantiated and frankly giving him too much credit.
What i’m saying is the prospect.org article is speculation of the events that happened behind closed doors. It jumps to conclusions to make a point of Schumers ineptitude by implying he orchestrated and supported the no votes, but doesn’t provides any source for those claims. Other articles being reported on today outline plenty of reasons Schumer is unfit to lead without making things up. For example:
Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution, said in a statement. "If he secretly backed this surrender and voted ‘no’ to save face, he’s a liar. If he couldn’t keep his caucus in line, he’s inept. Either way, he’s proven incapable of leading the fight to prevent health care premiums from skyrocketing for millions of Americans. The country can’t afford his failed leadership any longer.”
I really don’t care to defend Schumer, but posting this article as substantiated proof of him supporting Democrats capitulation is not really convincing. The article doesn’t mention what changed between it being widely assumed and it being a fact? Just starting a sentence with “in fact” doesn’t make it true. There are many other, more recent sources with his quotes saying he doesn’t approve of their actions.
It’s equally possible that Schumer has no control of the situation and the Senators who are voting for reopening the government know Schumer is spineless, and will only craft a strongly worded letter condemning their actions. The fact he went public with a proposal after reports of senators defecting isn’t proof he is complicit in their capitulation, just that he was unable to convince all the Democratic Senators that his plan was a good plan they should remain consistent about. Is Schumer responsible as the minority leader of the senate and ultimately to take the blame for the Democrats fracturing over this; yes. But to say he is secretly supporting the capitulation as if he’s Palpatine playing both sides is not really substantiated and frankly giving him too much credit.
Then stop doing it. You’re making yourself look foolish to put it as charitably as possible.
What i’m saying is the prospect.org article is speculation of the events that happened behind closed doors. It jumps to conclusions to make a point of Schumers ineptitude by implying he orchestrated and supported the no votes, but doesn’t provides any source for those claims. Other articles being reported on today outline plenty of reasons Schumer is unfit to lead without making things up. For example:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/11/10/progressives-call-for-schumers-resignation-after-shutdown-vote/87195871007/
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/10/schumer-is-no-longer-effective-dems-outraged-over-shutdown-deal-00644253