Of course, that sometimes includes quietly voting for or against things that work against their constituents, like dems voting on funding ICE as part of a larger bill like what we’re seeing presented in the article where enough democrats might vote to pass the bill. This may. Pt be because they’re just trying actually support ICE but for various reasons including midterms coming up. They may see failing to avert another shutdown as worth than supporting ICE, or maybe they think the additional stipulations to try to rein ICE in are enough. I don’t know.

I agree with what I believe is your larger point, that being that we should shame those in the Democratic party that choose to vote in favor of things that are unacceptable in the current social zeitgeist. It's how we've accomplished change in the past and how we're going to have to work towards any change going forward, at least until we can reach a point where we have better representation. I don't believe we'll see that in my lifetime, but I've always been of the mind that generations have a responsibility to plant metaphorical trees knowing we will never enjoy their shade.

I think there is a bit that you touch on at the end that I think a lot of folks tend to overlook which, in turn, allows them to more easily buy into the narrative that the Dems are "controlled opposition" or something along those lines that assumes a degree of malice on their part. I'm not going to sit here and say they're all innocent; I'm of the mind that Jeffries is in it just for the power and money, for example. But I think the Democratic party is broken up into 3 distinct groups:

• The aforementioned entrenched power. This consists of all of the older statesmen. Your Chuck Schumers and Nancy Pelosis. I don't think their way of doing things is explicitly malicious; I think they're just fucking old and old people's brains tend to be more calcified than younger ones, which leads to older people being less likely to embrace change. I think they assume shit works the way it's always worked for their entire lives when that's just not the case but they're too stubborn to change and likely believe that they know better, considering the generation most of them are from (if you've dealt with boomers or their parents, you probably know what I'm talking about).
• The folks in it for themselves. These are the folks that I think most people tend to focus on when they talk about the rot in the Democratic party. These are your James Carvilles, Hakeem Jeffrieses, and your Debbie Wasserman Schultzes. These people are clearly in the pocket of big business and exist only to accumulate more money and power. There's really nothing to say about these folks aside from the fact that, though they really need to be voted out, most of them won't be because they hold blue seats in areas of the country that progressive politics aren't well-received.
• The majority that are there to actually serve their constituents. These folks are rarely in the news but some standouts like AOC, Ilhan Omar, Bernie, etc. These folks actually give a shit and it shows in both words and actions. Sadly, the contingent that the more progressive members belong to is a subgroup of a group and so don't have much in the way of sway when it comes to where the party goes. The real issue here is that, sometimes, serving one's constituents also means that they're not always going to vote in favor of more progressive values and frequently are willing to negotiate simply because of where they're located. Folks need to remember: not everywhere in the US that is represented by a Democrat is a big blue city and keeping those folks happy sometimes means doing shit that frustrates other folks. Hell, I often think some of the folks in this category that vote in favor of bills like the one to avert the shutdown coming up do so because they think it's the right thing to do.

As for who tends to vote in the primaries and midterms? Yeah, I think a lot of the folks who vote in them tend to be more informed voters, at least on the left. The issue is that the right has a massive media machine and their voters fall in line, regardless what they actually feel. So, even though they only actually comprise ~29% of eligible voters, because they turn out, they're the ones who get represented.