When It Comes to Chuck Schumer, the Lessons of Zohran Mamdani Fell on Deaf Ears
Edited by Emilia Grabowski, Jordan Collinson, Owen Andrews, and Sarah Ahmad
“Senator Schumer is no longer effective and should be replaced. If you can’t lead the fight to stop healthcare premiums from skyrocketing for Americans, what will you fight for?”
These are the exasperated words of Representative Ro Khanna (D-CA), via his X account. He’s right—Minority Leader Schumer (D-NY) is a failure. His baffling incompetence as an opposition leader is an embarrassment to the nation, and his deftless handling of the government shutdown in the wake of sweeping Democrat victories in the 2025 elections was his greatest faux pas yet.
During the entire month of October leading into November, the United States experienced its longest federal shutdown in history. The economic consequences of this lengthy absence have been felt strongly across the country and will likely have ripple effects as time goes on. Over one million federal workers have been left without pay, and there have been broader impacts on food security, healthcare costs, small business loans, travel, and more.
The shutdown began partially due to refusal on the part of the Senate Republicans to extend expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies. For millions of Americans, expiration will increase their health insurance monthly expenses by hundreds of dollars for the rest of this year, with the potential for individuals’ yearly costs to more than double in 2026. Even accounting for economic stress, Schumer and the Senate Democrats, initially, seemed willing to hunker down and refuse to concede for the sake of individuals who depend on these subsidies.
Now, the shutdown is over. Eight Democratic senators voted with Republicans to advance a funding package that will reopen the government. A reasonable person would ask questions about what exactly the Democrats got out of this. Did they get extensions for those subsidies, which started the shutdown in the first place, in the bill? What concessions did they force their colleagues across the aisle to take in exchange for their support?
The eight Democrats who voted in support of the Republicans’ funding package are Angus King of Maine (an independent who caucuses with the Democrats), Tim Kaine of Virginia, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, and Catherine Cortez Masto and Jackie Rosen of Nevada. According to them, Republicans guaranteed a December vote in the Senate for legislation extending the expiring subsidies. Such a vote is highly unlikely to amount to anything, given the conservative makeup of Congress. Not only that, it is also highly unlikely that the legislation in question will reach the Senate floor. Before Sunday, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-MN) refused to commit to allowing passage through the House. After Sunday, Johnson expressed the same sentiment, and President Trump has stated he would not sign any extension into law. There was no change.
The Senate Democrats got a nakedly false promise, nothing more, and the blame lies on the slouched shoulders of Chuck Schumer as much as any of those eight who crossed over. He is the highest-ranking federal Democratic official, the leader and face of the party, and holds the most institutional power. All eight of the Democrats who voted with the Republicans share one thing in common with each other and Schumer—they’re not facing re-election in 2026. Schumer’s authority and the shared characteristics of the eight can lead to a number of conclusions about the minority leader.
If Schumer—who could be facing a 2028 primary challenge from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who is heavily favored—negotiated this backdoor deal and tasked the eight with taking the hit, then he is a coward. If he believed Republicans would earnestly honor their promise, then he is a fool. If he knew they wouldn’t, then he does not care about his constituents and the American people at large. If this deal occurred behind his back, then he has lost control of his caucus. Any one of these is disqualifying, not just for leadership, but for serving in public office.
Schumer isn’t the only one who is unworthy of his seat. King, one of the eight, had this to say for himself after contributing to one of the more embarrassing Democratic blunders of the decade:
“Standing up to Trump didn’t work. It actually gave him more power.”
This is unacceptable nonsense. Other prominent Democrats, like California and Illinois governors Gavin Newsom and J.B. Pritzker, have had no trouble standing up to the President on behalf of their constituents. Additionally, Trump and Republicans were ‘losing’ the shutdown. Over half of registered voters blamed shutdown headaches on the party with total control over the executive and legislative branches. By ending it early with no concessions, Democrats sacrificed both present and future political capital.
What makes this blunder worse for Schumer and Senate Democrats is that just earlier this month, Zohran Mamdani’s victory in New York provided a blueprint for what appeals to voters. Mamdani’s campaign embraced progressive messaging and touted expanded healthcare coverage, among other things. This man is a self-identified socialist in a country particularly hostile to that word, an unapologetic Muslim and anti-Zionist in an era of surging Islamophobia and heavy influence from the pro-Israel lobby, and was primarily opposed by the billionaire-backed former New York governor Andrew Cuomo and endorsed by Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, and Elon Musk.
Funnily enough, endorsements aren’t the only thing binding this group together—Cuomo, Trump, Clinton, and Musk each have received multiple allegations of sexual misconduct (birds of a feather, etcetera). One of these upstanding statesmen, President Trump, recently announced an investigation into former President Bill Clinton’s relations with Jeffrey Epstein, amidst substantial revelations regarding Trump’s own relations with Epstein.
Despite four of our country’s most accomplished creeps uniting against him, Mamdani managed to build a populist movement that earned him 51% of the vote in the general election. While Cuomo averaged five hundred and ninety-three dollars per donor and Mamdani averaged just ninety-eight, the former only attracted ten thousand individual donors compared with the latter’s over forty thousand.
Schumer himself never endorsed Mamdani and declined to reveal who he voted for in the November election. His refusal to endorse the candidate representing his party may have something to do with the nearly two million dollars he has received from pro-Israel lobbying groups. The elderly senator’s approach demonstrates a lack of understanding as to why the mayor-elect is a rising political star.
Mamdani didn’t win in spite of his expressed identities and values; he won because of them. You can distill the essence of his campaign into two words: relatability and affordability. He presents as a normal human being as opposed to a Super PAC-operated flesh puppet. He emphasized everyday issues that faced the average voter and proposed specific solutions to them. Chuck Schumer, Andrew Cuomo, Kamala Harris, and other corporate, mainline Democrats could learn from him. Unfortunately, it seems that Schumer has elected, instead, to remain set in his spineless, wet blanket ways.
80% of Americans want those ACA subsidies extended. Even 57% of MAGA Republicans want those ACA subsidies extended. It cannot be overstated how much of a failure this country has just witnessed on the part of the Senate Democrats, and it cannot be overstated how much Chuck Schumer needs to be pushed out of American politics altogether. He refuses to learn, and he needs to go. Ideally, his political career will end in a defeat to whoever rises from the field of primary challengers in 2028.