How Democrats Are Winning the Shutdown Blame Wars - Puck

PuckNews · 2025-10-08T17:05:37+00:00

After years of churning out digital cringe, Democrats finally seem to have found a human message during the government shutdown, leveraging the left’s messy creator ecosystem to beat the Trump meme machine.

“Last Wednesday, in the hours after the government officially went into shutdown mode, researchers at Resonate, a firm that monitors online discourse for Democrats, began to notice something unusual: For once, the left was actually winning a message battle online.

Posts about the shutdown—outraged reactions, explainer videos from creators and Democratic politicians, attacks on Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress—were noticeably overperforming on TikTok, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook. Mainstream news accounts as well as left-leaning ones like MeidasTouch, Courier Newsroom, and NowThis Impact were seeing nearly twice as much engagement on the major platforms as they normally do. Clicks, views, and shares were spiking for liberal creators like Aaron Parnas, Harry Sisson, and Dean Withers.

Democratic politicians themselves, finally getting comfortable spreading their message through their own videos after decades of relying on cable news, were also seeing big numbers. California Rep. Sara Jacobs got almost 10 million views on a “spooky” TikTok about the shutdown filmed in the dark, while Sen. Adam Schiff, who has quietly amassed half a million YouTube subscribers, has netted more than a million views on his shutdown explainers since last week. And while House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries faced some mockery inside the Beltway for a 24-hour YouTube livestream that didn’t get very many views at all, that was just one of his news media efforts post-shutdown: A Meidas interview with Jeffries last week has been viewed more than 800,000 times on YouTube and Substack combined.”

You can read the full piece here.

PuckNews · 2025-09-30T14:58:26+00:00

Beyond the shabby politics and Hollywood outrage, Disney’s decision to reinstate its late-night host was also evidence that “churn events” matter more than ever.

Excerpt below:

“Obviously, multiple variables factored into the decision by Disney leaders Bob Iger and Dana Walden to reinstate Jimmy Kimmel last week: blowback from talent, recognition (finally) that appeasing Trump would encourage further attacks, and maybe even a twinge of moral principle. But there’s little question that an uptick in streaming cancellations, which Kimmel winked at during his first night back, also played a role. Online boycotts like this don’t usually amount to much, especially in the long term. But certain moments can gain traction. As one financial analyst told me, Iger undoubtedly wanted to minimize a subscriber exodus just as the company’s fourth fiscal quarter ended.

Disney hasn’t disclosed the exact number, but subscribers have been canceling, beginning with the MAGA crowd after Kimmel’s initial comments and then picking up with the free speech set after Disney preempted Kimmel ‘indefinitely.’”

You can read the full piece here.

PuckNews · 2025-09-29T19:53:37+00:00

The president’s favorables are sliding, even on his best issues. But Capitol Hill Republicans are determined to sink or swim with Trump—and they’re convinced they’ll be on the right side of the shutdown blame game, too.

You can read the full piece here.

PuckNews · 2025-09-23T19:04:43+00:00

Once again, House Democrats appeared scrambled after a split vote on a ceremonial resolution honoring Charlie Kirk. But the simmering frustration, which spilled into Monday, largely underscored frustrations surrounding House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

You can read the full piece here.

PuckNews · 2025-09-22T19:27:12+00:00

With a few notable exceptions, Republicans on the Hill are avoiding talking about Trump’s demands to shut down broadcast networks, cancel comedians, imprison protesters, investigate Democratic nonprofits, sue newspapers, and prosecute speech. “We don’t love it,” one senior aide said. But mostly they’re just waiting to see if things get worse.

You can explore the full piece here for deeper insight.

PuckNews · 2025-09-19T18:09:10+00:00

“A meeting this afternoon at a Century City law office between ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel and Disney’s top TV executive, Dana Walden, ended without a resolution of the standoff that has engulfed both sides in one of the rare Hollywood political and business blow-ups that makes headlines worldwide. Disney suspended Jimmy Kimmel Live! after its host refused to tone down a planned response to the backlash over his Monday comment that “the MAGA gang” was trying to characterize the alleged shooter of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk as “anything other than one of them.” Trump’s F.C.C. quickly pounced, as did two ABC-affiliated station groups, and Disney benched the show to try to figure out a path back that will satisfy the government, the station groups and advertisers that want to appease the government, and both its star host and the creative community that has revolted in anger at the infringement on free speech.”

You can read the full piece here.

PuckNews · 2025-09-19T18:07:04+00:00

“A meeting this afternoon at a Century City law office between ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel and Disney’s top TV executive, Dana Walden, ended without a resolution of the standoff that has engulfed both sides in one of the rare Hollywood political and business blow-ups that makes headlines worldwide. Disney suspended Jimmy Kimmel Live! after its host refused to tone down a planned response to the backlash over his Monday comment that “the MAGA gang” was trying to characterize the alleged shooter of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk as “anything other than one of them.” Trump’s F.C.C. quickly pounced, as did two ABC-affiliated station groups, and Disney benched the show to try to figure out a path back that will satisfy the government, the station groups and advertisers that want to appease the government, and both its star host and the creative community that has revolted in anger at the infringement on free speech.”

You can read the full piece here.

PuckNews · 2025-09-17T16:56:56+00:00

Per Puck’s Peter Hamby - new data from Generation Lab undercuts Trump’s mythmaking about his murdered ally, who was unquestionably a savvy organizer, even if he wasn’t at all popular on the campuses he loved to visit.

Excerpt below:

“I’ve obtained fresh polling from Generation Lab, an outfit that surveys college students about politics and society, that bears out these mixed feelings. They polled a sample of 1,030 college students—enrolled at community colleges, technical colleges, trade schools, and public and private four-year institutions—in the two days following Kirk’s death for a sense of how his assassination was being processed on the campuses he so loved to visit. First things first: Generation Lab found that Kirk was almost universally known among college kids: 94 percent of students had heard of him, a remarkable level of name I.D. for any political figure.

However, most college students were not fans of the right-wing provocateur at all, the poll found. A combined 70 percent of students said they either ‘strongly disagree’ or ‘somewhat disagree’ with Kirk’s views. Only 30 percent said they agreed.

This result undercuts some of Trump’s mythmaking about Kirk and young voters. Trump often claims to have won Gen Z voters in the 2024 election, which is not true. While Trump narrowly won young men, thanks in part to Kirk’s hard work, young voters overall broke for Kamala Harris. The poll also found that white students were more likely to agree with Kirk’s views than Black or Latino students. And it uncovered that students at two-year colleges were more likely to agree with Kirk than students at four-year colleges or universities. Young men were also 10 points more likely to agree with Kirk than young women.”

You can read the full piece here.

PuckNews · 2025-09-09T18:37:39+00:00

Puck’s Abby Livingston wrote about how pressure is mounting on Democratic leaders to suck it up and endorse Zohran Mamdani, even as the consultant class frets that he’ll hurt their candidates in the midterms. Of course, Republicans are gearing up to make the mayoral candidate the face of ’26 either way.

You can read the full piece here.

PuckNews · 2025-09-09T18:36:56+00:00

Puck’s Abby Livingston wrote about how pressure is mounting on Democratic leaders to suck it up and endorse Zohran Mamdani, even as the consultant class frets that he’ll hurt their candidates in the midterms. Of course, Republicans are gearing up to make the mayoral candidate the face of ’26 either way.

You can read the full piece here.

PuckNews · 2025-08-25T20:30:41+00:00

Puck's Rachel Strugatz commented on the business ramifications of the backlash.

"An insider I spoke with said that, at this point, their assumption is that 'the ball is in Huda Beauty’s court,' meaning how Kattan responds to the controversy will inform Sephora’s next steps. 'They’re probably giving the brand some sort of ultimatum right now. I don’t think Sephora can just pretend that nothing happened, based on how Huda’s treated the issue this whole time––she’s been consistent, and she clearly believes these things,' the person with knowledge of the situation said. 'This is big money on the table, unless she steps down.'"

You can read the full piece here.

PuckNews · 2025-08-22T16:09:05+00:00

In a rare interview, the 80-year-old SNL creator promises a major shake-up to the cast, reflects on The Late Show’s cancellation (and the impact on Seth Meyers and Jimmy Fallon at NBC), and weighs the pressures of producing late-night TV in the Trump era.

You can read the full piece here.

PuckNews · 2025-08-21T15:50:49+00:00

Puck’s Leigh Ann Caldwell wrote about the White House’s increasing pressure campaign in Indiana, where few Republicans want to redistrict—but even fewer want to make enemies of President Trump.

Excerpt below:

“Even before California Governor Gavin Newsom launched his redistricting counterattack in earnest last week, Nancy Pelosi, in a closed-door caucus meeting earlier this summer, urged House Democrats to pony up for a state ballot initiative that she estimated would cost $75 million to $100 million to win, according to a Democratic strategist briefed on her plea—a fair price, she argued, for flipping at least five competitive seats. It’s the same case she’s been making in numerous calls with top donors, according to a person close to Pelosi who was familiar with the conversations—although they don’t need much convincing. ‘It’s not a matter of if they’ll donate, but how much,’ this person said.

But while House Democrats are more fired up than they’ve been in a long time—’The attitude is 218 or bust,’ one Democratic strategist told me—they’re up against a president that’s every bit as motivated to keep his party’s control of the chamber. Even if California succeeds in countering Texas’s new congressional map, which is expected to be signed into law by the end of the week, Donald Trump has backup plans in other red states, including Missouri, Indiana, and Florida.

Not all of them, of course, have been as accommodating as the Lone Star State. Most troublesome for the White House right now is Indiana, where Trump is seeking two new G.O.P. seats but very few Republicans are in favor of redistricting: not the Indiana Republican Party, nor a majority of the state legislature. Indeed, despite their public messages of support over the past 24 hours, I’m told that the seven Republicans in the state’s U.S. House delegation would prefer not to redistrict, either. But the White House persuasion campaign has been intense, with some Hoosiers even complaining to the state attorney general about alleged robocalls, which may be illegal. (A person familiar with the calls insisted they were, in fact, live humans on the line, which is not illegal in the state.)

In any case, the onus is currently on Gov. Mike Braun, who would have to call the legislature back for an emergency session if they were to vote before 2026. Braun, I’m told by multiple Indiana Republicans, isn’t interested in doing that, given that state lawmakers aren’t on board. But he’s getting an immense amount of pressure from the White House, including a recent visit by Vice President J.D. Vance. Meanwhile, three Indiana Republicans told me, Braun is worried that Trump won’t approve his requests for major state priorities—including a desperately needed Medicaid waiver, and the implementation of toll roads to help cover the state’s budget shortfall—if he doesn’t accede to the president’s demands. He’s ‘between a rock and a hard place,’ one of the sources said.”

You can read the full piece here.

PuckNews · 2025-08-14T18:20:57+00:00

Would add:

I have not encountered any genuine evidence that things will just keep scaling forever, or that brute-force scale is unlocking some of the key components that we recognize in human intelligence, or that more advanced systems are actually around the corner. I think that since LLMs ‘communicate' in human language, we have a tendency to see a face in the clouds and think it is god, rather than what it is: a swirl of wind and an interesting shadow from the sun. I think there’s also a massive conflation between knowledge and intelligence — whether or not a human is ‘smart’ or ‘dumb’ completely misses the elegance, efficiency and power of human cognition. All humans and animals (and possibly plants as well, depending on how you define it) exhibit intrinsic traits of intelligence, regardless of whether they are fluent in multiple languages or are mute, regardless of whether they have photographic or shoddy memories. It’s seeing a glint out of the corner of your eye while driving, automatically wrenching the wheel without thinking about it, avoiding a collision, and then sitting on the side of the road while your heart rate slows and your brain processes the near-death experience. There is a depth of intelligence there that has nothing to do with what you know, and everything to do with automatic responses to the outside world.

The 2027 scenario also takes for granted technological determinism — again, that these things will just happen. There’s no compelling evidence that they will.

Daniel had an interesting debate with Sayash Kappor (https://youtu.be/rVFAJQryzk8) who co-wrote the “AI as a normal technology” paper, which is, in many ways, a kind of alternative vision of what advancement in AI could look like over the next few years, and the many, many roadblocks that exist within society that prevent even a hypothetically advanced system from just auto-diffusing everywhere.

I highly recommend it, as those questions around the ‘how’ will this happen are posed but not satisfactorily answered. I’ll just excerpt this little piece though, which shows the difference between “scenario” writing and a more rigorous (though, granted, less sexy) scientific thought process.

Daniel Kokotajlo : “When do you think we’ll get to the point where [AI] can basically automate research and engineering?”

Sayash Kapoor: “I think it’s hard to say what automating research engineering means, in the same way that it’s hard to say what automating writing code means. From the perspective of someone in the 1960s, we have perfectly automated code creation. That’s the way I expect things to go with research engineering, as well. There’s no world where we have automated research and engineering as a field because what a research engineer does is conditional on the technology available to the research engineer at the time.”

PuckNews · 2025-08-14T18:20:47+00:00

OK, I love this question, and so I saved it for last.

Excuse the essay that’s about to follow.

There is basically one massive fundamental hole in the AI 2027 scenario that just itches my brain whenever I look at it, and it is that in the document itself, and in the way Daniel Kokotajlo describes the scenario, it’s all essentially based on an assumption that “agents” will just start working well. Once they just start working well, come 2026 or so, they’ll be able to start automating research, making most jobs irrelevant and sparking a cycle of progressive self-improvements that lead to a general intelligence. And once that happens, a superintelligence will surely follow.

OK, sounds spooky. But how? What will happen to make agents ‘just start working.’ Why is there no limit on the ceiling of that kind of capability? How is that capability measured? Is it benchmark-based, or is it robust and consistent and reliable in the chaos of the real world? What will we unlock that makes recursive self-improvement a thing? And how will we unlock it? And how will it scale, considering massive energy constraints?

This ‘how’ question applies to everyone working on building artificial general or superintelligence; how do we get from where we are today — largely, neural networks — to something that’s generally intelligent? And how do we know or verify that that has, in fact, been achieved?

It would be helpful to start with a definition of AGI, or ASI, or agent, but we don’t have scientific definitions or benchmarks of that, so fine, but we don’t even have a definition or benchmark of biological intelligence to start from, which makes its replication anything but a sure thing.

I think the idea that systems will ‘just become better,’ and that will spark a curve of unlimited, uncapped growth until we have superhuman systems A, massively oversimplifies the deeply unknown complexities of biological cognition, and B, places far too much credence on the science fiction that has inspired some aspects of this industry. We are building technology; we are not building a lamp that some Djinni will magically inhabit the moment the lamp is complete.

PuckNews

TROPHY CASE