Politics

2026 Democrats jump to pan the shutdown deal

Published

8 months ago

November 10, 2025

Senate Democrats’ embrace of a shutdown deal that doesn’t guarantee extended health care subsidies is already an electoral issue.

Nearly every major Democratic Senate candidate panned the deal, from Texas hopeful Colin Allred, a former member of Congress, deriding it as a “joke” to Illinois Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton condemning it as a “complete betrayal of the American people.” Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), the party’s most vulnerable incumbent in 2026, voted against advancing it, as did several senators eyeing a 2028 White House bid.

“Pathetic,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote on X. “This is not a deal — it’s an empty promise,” Gov. JB Pritzker of Illinois said.

The Sunday agreement even caused a familial dispute: Stefany Shaheen, who is running in a crowded Democratic primary for an open House seat in New Hampshire, said she couldn’t support a deal that failed to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits. Her mother, retiring Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, was one of the lead Democratic negotiators of the deal.

Democratic Rep. Chris Pappas, who is running to replace Jeanne Shaheen, creating the very opening her daughter is vying to fill, also rejected it in a statement Monday.

After looking to make soaring health care costs an albatross for Republicans in the midterms, Democrats’ deal to reopen the government after 40 days without language extending the expiring insurance subsidies delivered a blow to their base. The result was so fraught, even Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) opposed it amid intense criticism for allowing eight members of the Democratic caucus to side with Republicans.

Now it’s creating a litmus test for candidates in competitive midterm races next year, as Democrats fight to retake the Senate — a tough task they feel better about after routing Republicans in last week’s off-cycle elections throughout the country. They’d need to net four seats in order to seize control of the upper chamber.

“The infighting over the deal will fade quickly and by the time we get closer to the midterms, it’s very clear that Democrats will aggressively prosecute the case against Republicans on health care,” said Matt Bennett of the centrist think tank Third Way. “They will say Republicans yanked lifesaving money away from millions of Americans to fund tax cuts for the rich. And that will have the benefit of being true.”

Thirty-three Senate seats are up for grabs next year and Democrats are making a serious play for holding or flipping at least a dozen of them. A quartet of candidates vying for open seats — Graham Platner in Maine, Mallory McMorrow in Michigan and Zach Wahls and Nathan Sage in Iowa — reiterated their opposition to Schumer’s leadership as news of the deal spread.

“Chuck Schumer failed in his job yet again,” Platner said in a video on X. “We need to elect leaders who want to fight. … Call your senators and tell them Chuck Schumer can no longer be leader. Call your congressman and tell them that they cannot vote for this when it comes to them.”

In Michigan’s three-way primary, each candidate panned the deal, representing the ideologically vast opposition within a party otherwise mired in internal dispute.

“This is a bad deal,” McMorrow said in a video late Sunday, adding that “the old way of doing things is not working.” Abdul El-Sayed slammed the “shit” agreement and castigated Democrats for giving up their leverage “when we actually can force [Republicans] to the table” after their electoral losses last week. Rep. Haley Stevens said the deal “doesn’t work for Michigan” and that she’s “going to need a whole lot more than empty promises that we’re going to lower costs.” She did not say how she’d vote on the measure in the House.

Senate Democrats’ capitulation opened an off-ramp to the record-breaking government shutdown that has snarled air travel and led to missed paychecks and lapsed food assistance. The agreement now advancing through the Senate would fund some agencies and programs for the full fiscal year and extend others until Jan. 30, 2026. It also promises Democrats a December floor vote on extending the expiring Obamacare subsidies, though it’s uncertain to pass the GOP-controlled chamber and Speaker Mike Johnson won’t promise to bring up such a vote in the House.

But in cutting a deal, Senate Democrats infuriated a party reinvigorated by its off-year electoral blowout, sparking accusations that the party again squandered its only leverage in the Republican-led Congress — and ensuring Schumer’s leadership will remain a touchstone in competitive Senate races.

None of the eight Democrats who voted to break the shutdown stalemate are facing voters next year. Two are retiring; the rest are not up for reelection until at least 2028.

They cited the financial pain the prolonged federal funding lapse was inflicting on their constituents. They cast the pending floor vote on the tax credits as a win for Democrats. And they touted other concessions they secured, like the rehiring of federal workers laid off during the shutdown.

“This bill is not perfect, but it takes important steps to reduce their shutdown’s hurt,” Sen. Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Senate Democrat who is retiring next year, said Sunday.

The Democrats vying to replace him disagree. Stratton, who’s previously called for new Senate leadership, cast Democrats’ cave as “a complete betrayal of the American people.” Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi and Robin Kelly both said the outcome failed to help millions of people whose health care premiums are set to skyrocket.

Across the Senate map, opposition spanned Schumer’s handpicked recruits — who’ve been largely silent about the shutdown — to the insurgents who’ve called for his ouster.

“This is a bad deal for Ohioans,” former Sen. Sherrod Brown said in a statement. Maine Gov. Janet Mills panned “the promise of a vote [on the subsidies] that won’t go anywhere.” Former North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper — Democrats’ best chance for flipping a Senate seat and the last major candidate to weigh in on the deal — said in a statement that “any deal that lets health care costs continue to skyrocket is unacceptable.

Sage slammed the Senate Democrats who “caved and accomplished nothing.” Jordan Wood, another Democrat running in Maine, said “America needs an opposition party willing to fight for them.” Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan said in a video, “we deserve so much more than this bullshit.” Hours later, she was endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who voted against the deal.

“If people believe this is a ‘deal,’ I have a bridge to sell you,” said Flanagan’s rival, Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.), adding that she’s a “no” when the measure comes up for a vote in the House. “I’m not going to put 24 million Americans at risk of losing their health care.”

Senate Democrats who brokered the spending deal argued Sunday that they had succeeded in hanging rising health care costs on Republicans’ necks heading into the midterms.

“If Republicans want to join us in lowering costs for working families, they have the perfect opportunity,” Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nevada) said Sunday at the Capitol. “If they do choose not to come to the table, they can own the disastrous premium increases.”

Democrats continued to target their own.

Rep. Mikie Sherrill, who was elected the next governor of New Jersey in last week’s blue wave, denounced the deal as “malpractice.” Zohran Mamdani, New York City’s incoming mayor who Schumer declined to endorse, said the compromise and anyone who supports it “should be rejected.”

“That’s not a deal,” Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.), who drew a primary challenge last week, said Sunday. “It’s an unconditional surrender.”

The political blast radius is extending to Schumer, who is up for reelection in 2028.

Some progressive Democrats and advocacy groups called for his ouster as leader, blaming him for failing to keep his caucus in line even as he voted against the deal he said didn’t address the “health care crisis” and vowed to “keep fighting.”

Schumer “is no longer effective and should be replaced,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), a potential 2028er, blasted out on X.

The Sunrise Movement called for Schumer to step aside. Justice Democrats urged voters to reject the eight Senate Democrats who allowed the funding patch to proceed.

“I don’t think the Democrats leading this surrender effort understand the trust they are shattering in their own voting coalition,” Andrew O’Neill, the national advocacy director for Indivisible, warned Sunday night.

Schumer voted against the bill because it does “nothing” to address a “health care crisis” he called “devastating.” He pledged to “keep fighting.”

As House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, too, vowed to fight on, O’Neill called for his caucus to follow suit. Several said Sunday that they would.

Adam Wren contributed to this report.

Politics

Could Switzerland find a winning XI out of 10 million?

Published

4 minutes ago

July 2, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Foreign-born players are increasingly a fixture of teams across the World Cup. In Switzerland, which faces off against Algeria tonight, the politics of a progressively diverse population have literally been on the ballot as the tournament unfolds.

Last month, just days after the first World Cup games kicked off, voters in Switzerland weighed in on an initiative from the right-wing Swiss People’s Party that would have capped Switzerland’s population at 10 million people until 2050. Under the proposal, a series of strict immigration controls would come into place as soon as the population crossed the 9.5 million mark. (It’s currently around 9.1 million.)

The vote came as the country’s national team took the field reflecting one of the soccer world’s most ethnically diverse player pools. Sixteen of the 26 players, or 62 percent of the team, have family roots from abroad, according to data compiled by the Institute for Economics and Peace. (Only France, England, Canada and Australia had higher percentages in that category.) Three of Switzerland’s 26 players were born abroad themselves.

It’s a distinctive feature of Swiss politics — and its robust system of direct democracy — that proposals like the “No to a Switzerland with 10 million!” initiative appear directly before voters. As often as four times a year, voters are confronted with federal, state and local proposals. (In 2024, they even weighed in on whether to ax public funding for Eurovision.)

In the end, 55 percent of voters rejected the initiative. For the time being the question of Switzerland’s multiculturalism will be on the field but off the table.

Politics

Portugal plays bigger than its size — in both politics and soccer

Published

1 hour ago

July 2, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Despite Cristiano Ronaldo’s travails, Portugal heads into tonight’s World Cup knockout match against Croatia as a strong contender to win this year’s tournament. Victory in Toronto tonight would keep it on track for the latter stages — and reinforce a national brand that has consolidated the Atlantic country as a powerhouse far beyond the soccer field.

Portugal is home to just over 10 million people and has a modest economic footprint, but the small European nation has a remarkable track record when it comes to placing its candidates in top posts around the world.

Within the EU, Portugal stands out as having had more of its candidates occupy top institutional posts than any of the bloc’s other member countries. Since 1986, Portuguese citizens have served as president of the European Commission, the Court of Auditors, the Eurogroup, the Committee of the Regions — and former Prime Minister António Costa currently presides over the European Council. There has also been a Portuguese EU ombudsman, a vice president of the European Central Bank and nine vice presidents of the European Parliament.

Beyond the bloc, former Prime Minister António Guterres currently serves as United Nations secretary-general. And just last month the country scored a fresh diplomatic victory by beating out the larger, wealthier and more globally influential Germany to secure one of the vacant, nonpermanent seats on the U.N. Security Council.

According to former Portuguese Secretary of State for Internationalization Bernardo Ivo Cruz, Lisbon’s decision to go after top jobs on the global stage is an existential matter.

“After democracy was restored following the 1974 Carnation Revolution, we realized that our survival as a country depended on multilateralism: we’re too small to guarantee our strategic interests, and those of our citizens, on our own,” he said. “To do that, we needed to guarantee the world remained a place governed by the rule of law.”

The former diplomat said Portugal had worked hard to establish itself as a fair player that is capable of speaking with everyone on equal terms. “Being a small country is actually an advantage, because no one is afraid of us, and that makes us nonthreatening interlocutors,” he noted.

Thanks to its nearly 900-year history, Portugal has long-standing relationships with nearly every other nation. The bonds are especially strong with Portuguese-speaking former colonies like Brazil, Macau and Cape Verde, parts of the world with which Lisbon has worked to forge ties based on equal terms. And those good vibes among allies have been instrumental in having Portuguese candidates confirmed to posts where neutrality and a respect for the rules of diplomacy are paramount.

“The candidates that secure these top posts aren’t supposed to unfairly benefit their home countries,” Cruz noted. “But they benefit Portugal in a broad sense because they defend that multilateralism that benefits all countries, including our own.”

The matter, he added, was taken so seriously in Portugal that the country’s politicians had a habit of backing their candidates for international posts no matter what their politics might be.

“Our stance is that we never mix up internal drama with things happening beyond our borders,” he said. “You may hate someone in Lisbon, but the moment they’re up for an important post it becomes a matter of defending the interests of the state, and personal issues have no relevance there.”

Beyond political institutions like the U.N. or the European Council, Cruz said Portugal had a vested interest in the kind of soft diplomacy that plays out in sporting events like the World Cup.

“Evidently, if we end up winning this match, it only reinforces our country’s international prestige, and is a cause for celebration,” But, he added, “whatever happens, I think this edition of the World Cup is turning out to be a success for everyone.”

“Rather than hooliganism, what we’ve seen are the Scots marching through U.S. cities with their bagpipes and kilts, the Norwegians delighting American spectators with their rowing rituals,” he noted. “At a moment of such immense global tension, we all win by having this competition be defined by friendly celebration.”

Indeed, in much the same way that the small European nation is a force to be reckoned with when it comes to football, it also punches far above its weight in terms of broad international influence.

Politics

The Croatian team’s favorite singer is a fascist salute away from the mainstream

Published

2 hours ago

July 2, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

BELGRADE, Serbia — When Croatian supporters flooded Toronto and Philadelphia this summer, draping city halls in the red-and-white checkerboards found on the Croatian coat of arms and belting out one power ballad after another, the loudest songs, as always, belonged to Marko Perković.

“He’s become an inseparable phenomenon anytime Croatia plays or participates in any kind of competition, especially sporting events,” said Hrvoje Klasić, the leading Croatian historian focused on the legacy of World War II.

“People both at home and abroad view him as synonymous with love for one’s country,” he continued.

Better known as Thompson, after the submachine gun he carried in the Balkan wars of the 1990s, he is the country’s most popular singer — and its most enduring embarrassment.

Croatian fans have made his song, “Lijepa Li Si,” the unofficial anthem of the team and a fixture at every match, a song whose chorus salutes the wartime Croat statelet in Bosnia whose leadership was convicted of war crimes.

Thompson’s wider catalog is more explicit still. One track opens with “Za dom spremni,” the salute that functioned as Croatia’s answer to “Sieg Heil” during the World War II Ustashe regime.

In the past, his concerts have been banned or canceled in the Netherlands, Switzerland, Slovenia, Austria and Germany.

None of this is fringe within Croatia, however. Last summer Thompson drew more than 500,000 people to a single Zagreb concert, the largest in the country’s history, where fans chanted the same Ustashe slogan while the authorities looked away.

In 2018, when Croatia nearly won the World Cup, the second-placed team was welcomed back with Thompson aboard the victory bus and star midfielder Luka Modrić personally asking for him to perform.

Croatia has spent three decades declining to reckon with the Ustashe past, treating the fascist puppet state’s symbols as heritage rather than crime.

Across post-communist Europe, the end of the Cold War brought a wave of historical revisionism, as nations that felt their identity had been suppressed under communism recast neo-Nazi and far-right figures as patriots. Hungary, Ukraine and the Baltic states, as well as Croatia, have all made a version of this bargain, folding once-condemned nationalists into their modern national myths.

“These nations believe they were robbed of their national identities in the past century or are dissatisfied with their country’s present achievements, so they reach back into the past for themes from a more distinguished past,” Klasić concluded.