E-Paper
Fallout out of the government shutdown blame game in US
This article is authored by Prabhu Dayal, former ambassador, New Delhi.
The recent US government shutdown, which began on October 1, 2025 and finally ended on November 12, 2025, was the longest in history and indicates several prominent and intensifying trends in US politics such as the deepening political polarisation and hostility, the increasing use of fiscal brinkmanship as a political tool, and a growing struggle over the executive versus legislative balance of power.
The most striking trend is the extent to which partisan divisions have intensified, leading to an atmosphere of "bad blood" between the two major parties, the Democrats and the Republicans. Unlike past shutdowns, which often involved late-night bipartisan negotiations, the recent one was reportedly characterised by a near-complete lack of cooperation and a focus on recrimination. Both Democrats and Republicans seemed to believe there was political value in "digging in" and refusing to compromise, even as the negative impacts on federal workers and the public mounted. This suggests a political environment where partisan victory is prioritised over functional governance.
Government shutdowns have become a more regular feature of US politics, transforming the annual appropriations process from a routine legislative duty into a high-stakes political conflict. The 2025 shutdown was viewed by some within the Trump administration as a "strategic opening" or an "unprecedented opportunity" to achieve policy goals—specifically, downsizing the federal workforce and cutting "wasteful bureaucracy"—that could not be passed through normal legislative means.
The willingness of politicians to allow significant public disruption—including flight cancellations, delayed food assistance (SNAP) benefits for low-income families, and the suspension of environmental permits and patent approvals—indicates a trend where the negative consequences for citizens are acceptable collateral damage in a policy dispute.
The standoff highlighted an ongoing power struggle between the executive branch and Congress, as well as an internal one between the two parties within the legislature. A secondary demand from Democrats, beyond health care subsidies, was to rein in President Trump's use of executive powers to rescind or withhold congressionally approved funds. This points to a trend of the executive branch testing the limits of its authority over fiscal operations. The inability of Congress to pass basic funding bills on time underscores internal divisions within both parties (e.g., hardline Republicans initially opposing a temporary bill) and a broader legislative dysfunction, which shifts more power to the President and agency heads to manage during a crisis. In essence, the recent shutdown reflects a political system where ideological rigidity and a breakdown in trust have made basic governance increasingly difficult, relying on crisis points to force outcomes rather than on compromise and deliberation.
The recent 2025 US government shutdown has highlighted several key aspects of Donald Trump's political approach and influence, primarily indicating his willingness to engage in high-stakes brinkmanship and his strong commitment to his policy priorities, even at the cost of significant public disruption. The first among these is a willingness to use the shutdown as leverage. The shutdown began after Congress failed to pass appropriations legislation, largely due to a standoff over the expiration of expanded Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies, a key Democratic priority. Trump and the Republican-controlled House used the funding lapse as leverage in negotiations, demonstrating a strategy of standing firm on fiscal issues and entitlement cuts regardless of the consequences.
Another important aspect is anxiety over Trump's focus on restructuring the government. The final deal included a provision that temporarily limits the President's ability to fire federal workers until January 30, 2026. This suggests that a broader restructuring of the federal workforce was a potential goal, an indication of his administration's interest in increasing the efficiency and control of executive power, which critics argue is an overreach of authority.
The shutdown also demonstrated centralised decision making. The shutdown negotiations were reportedly marked by back-and-forth between congressional leaders and the President, with Trump making key interventions via social media to direct Republican strategy, such as calling for the "nuclear option" to end the Senate filibuster. This indicates a leadership style focused on direct control and a desire to bypass legislative norms to achieve his objectives.
Trump initially took a hard line, but eventually supported the bipartisan deal that ended the shutdown, hailing it as a "big victory". The shift suggests a pragmatic approach to ending the political and economic damage when the public impact (e.g., flight disruptions, loss of food assistance) became too severe, while simultaneously claiming a win for his party's messaging.
While many agencies were affected, the deal fully funded some departments like Veterans Affairs and Agriculture for the entire year. This indicates a strategic choice to protect services that resonate with core political bases while using others as bargaining chips.Ultimately, the shutdown indicated Trump's brand of populist, confrontational politics, where established legislative processes are challenged in pursuit of policy goals and political victories, regardless of the disruption caused to government services and American citizens.
Recent polls from November 2025 indicate that Donald Trump's popularity is on the wane, with declining approval ratings among the general public, including among Republicans and key demographics like Hispanic and young voters. Multiple polls show a consistent downward trend. A recent CNN/SSRS survey indicated an approval rating of 37%, the lowest for any President at this point in a second term in history. Other aggregators place his approval around 41-42%. Disapproval ratings are high, with the CNN survey showing 63% disapproval, a figure nearly identical to his all-time low recorded in January 2021.
Trump's approval has dropped significantly throughout 2025, starting from 47% in January and falling by around 10 percentage points by November. A primary driver of the decline is public dissatisfaction with the economy, including frustration over his tariff policies, inflation, and job growth. His net approval on the economy and inflation is now negative. The decline is not limited to Democrats or independents; approval among Republican voters has also decreased, dropping from 91% at his inauguration to around 68-79% in recent polls. His standing among Hispanic adults and young voters has deteriorated considerably since the start of the year, with a significant majority of these groups now disapproving of his performance.
The government shutdown has also been cited as a factor in the recent dip in public support and rising voter frustration. The current polling data suggests a significant shift in public opinion, with the majority of Americans expressing disapproval of his job performance across a range of issues.
Recent state elections on November 4 and 5th, 2025, in Virginia, New Jersey, New York City, and California, have also been widely interpreted as indicators of public dissatisfaction with President Donald Trump's performance. Democrats achieved significant victories in these states, with outcomes such as Abigail Spanberger becoming the first woman Governor in Virginia and Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill winning by a double-digit margin in New Jersey. These wins were largely seen as a "blue wave" response to the President.
Zohran Mamdani, a progressive Democratic socialist, was also elected as the Mayor of New York City, a victory widely seen as occurring despite strong opposition from Trump. Mamdani's win made him the city's first Muslim, South Asian, and youngest mayor in over a century. Trump, a native New Yorker, was a vocal opponent of Mamdani during the campaign. He repeatedly called Mamdani a "communist" and a "dangerous socialist" and threatened to withhold federal funding from New York City if Mamdani won. In an unusual move, Trump publicly endorsed Mamdani's independent opponent, former Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo.
Mamdani's campaign focused on local affordability issues such as a rent freeze for rent-stabilised apartments, free public buses, and city-run grocery stores, which resonated with working-class voters. He largely focused on these concrete issues rather than national political debates, a strategy that exit polls suggest helped him win over some voters in traditionally Trump-leaning districts.
Mamdani's victory, along with other Democratic wins in New Jersey and Virginia, was interpreted by many analysts as a significant symbolic defeat for Trump and an early indicator of voter sentiment ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. As Mamdani said following his win, and directly challenging the President: "If anyone can show a nation betrayed by Donald Trump how to defeat him, it is the city that gave rise to him".
This article is authored by Prabhu Dayal, former ambassador, New Delhi.
