A MESSAGE FROM OUR SPONSOR

Hospitals are here when you need us most – but hospitals across America are at risk of closure.

On Friday, House Democrats found themselves divided and under attack from Republicans over a ceremonial resolution concerning the slain conservative influencer Charlie Kirk. Dozens of Democrats had voted against honoring his “life and legacy” over what they said were his views on race, antisemitic rhetoric, and instances of tacit support for political violence—which meant they were also voting against the language condemning his murder. Many Democrats denounced the killing in separate statements, but Republicans clearly saw an opening: The R.N.C.’s comms shop blasted out a release declaring that, counting “present” votes and absences, “the majority of House Democrats just refused to condemn an assassination.”

But the Democratic anger that simmered into Monday was less about the Republican messaging than the lack of direction from their own boss, Hakeem Jeffries, whose guidance ahead of the vote was that leadership would support the resolution but members should vote their consciences. The result was a strange breakdown of 95 Democratic yea votes, 58 nays, 38 presents, and 22 absences. “It gave Republicans exactly what they wanted,” an uber-wired Dem lobbyist grumbled. “It divided the party.” The discord underscored the most common criticism of the House Democratic leader: his propensity to be an indirect, unclear communicator at a time when the party is desperate for marching orders.

A MESSAGE FROM OUR SPONSOR

Hospitals need your help to stay. Protect 24/7 care—because when the doors close, it is too late.

Many feared that this indecision might foreshadow Jeffries’ approach to the significant tests the party will face this fall: To start, Democrats will be confronted with a new phase of the Trump administration, wherein the president has vowed to expand ICE and deploy the National Guard to new cities. Meanwhile, most of Washington believes a government shutdown next week is nearly inevitable. Then come the midterms, which would normally favor the out-of-power Dems, but Republican-led redistricting efforts are scrambling the map despite California’s best defensive efforts. Jeffries, a politician best known for caution, will be at the center of all these fights.

When Jeffries took leadership of the caucus, House Dems actually welcomed his lighter-touch approach. But these days, some members long for his predecessor Nancy Pelosi’s more centralized style. Pelosi was decisive, highly organized, and almost always offered explicit guidance to members casting hard votes—and, in particular, the language they should use to defend them. In May, ex-Pelosi aide Ashley Etienne went nuclear over Jeffries’ leadership style to Politico, criticizing his failure to circulate talking points and remarking that Pelosi’s team “actually landed punches” on Trump. (Pelosi, who has closely mentored Jeffries, implicitly distanced herself from those comments.) Since then, some of Jeffries’ Democratic critics on the Hill have admitted that he’s grown into the role, but those frustrations are once again coming to the surface.

Naturally, his most immediate problem is shutdown politics. Jeffries and his Senate counterpart, Chuck Schumer, are presenting a united front this time around. (During the negotiations last March, Jeffries got his members to vote a near-unanimous “no” on the last Republican spending bill, only for Schumer to save it in the Senate.) Historically, the House Democratic caucus is almost always united on spending fights, and last week’s vote was no exception; only one Democrat, Maine’s Jared Golden, voted in favor. And yet, if the Senate eventually fails to pass the bill, Democrats will have to figure out how to avoid being blamed for the results—which is why messaging discipline will be so crucial in the next few weeks. To that end, Democratic leaders are building out a bicameral war room and a rapid response effort.

And while many Democrats yearn for clear guidance from leadership, one of the main complaints about Jeffries is stylistic. In many ways, Jeffries’ leadership style seems to have been forged during his time as a corporate attorney, a profession where risk aversion, hunting for win-win outcomes, and consensus-building are paramount—basically, the exact opposite profile of the wartime leader that many Democrats are craving. In short, his calm demeanor doesn’t always accord with the rage that Democrats want him to channel. When D.H.S. detained one of Jerry Nadler’s staffers in his New York City district office, Jeffries told CNN that House Dems would respond “in a time, place, and manner of our choosing.” At the time, many were furious at his tepid response to the detainment of a House staffer cuffed on House premises.

Sure, some Democrats have argued that Jeffries should be given some leeway to figure out how to navigate Trump 2.0. As the leader of a House minority party, indeed, he has little power to actually sink legislation. “There’s frustration all over the place,” the Democratic lobbyist told me. “We’re looking for a messiah who’s going to step in, but that doesn’t work when you’re in the minority and not in the White House.” But that logic, obviously, hasn’t completely permeated a frustrated party looking for answers.

When it comes to the looming midterms, however, Jeffries has operated the Democratic campaign with effectiveness. “In the end, he will be judged on whether he wins back the House of Representatives, and that is his North Star,” a source close to Jeffries told me. To that end, many Democrats credit Jeffries as a strong steward of the D.C.C.C. and its coffers. Even a Republican source pointed me to the August committee filings, which showed that House Democrats raised $7 million to the Republicans’ $4 million—an achievement during an otherwise challenging era for Democratic fundraising.

As Republicans continue to pursue a mid-decade redistricting effort to gain House seats for their party, Jeffries has struggled against largely endemic forces to redraw maps in blue states, which either face higher barriers for redistricting or are already maximally gerrymandered in Dems’ favor. (California’s redistricting, led by Gavin Newsom, will have to be approved via popular referendum in November; Texas and Missouri have already passed new maps through their Republican-held legislatures.) Still, Jeffries traveled the country to rally the troops and shipped money to the California fight, and the party is largely optimistic that California will neutralize Republican redraws.

But the political climate seems to have changed in the wake of Kirk’s assassination, and it’s unclear what impact that will have on the midterms. The president, after all, has threatened to go after the “radical left,” and his vice president has discussed disrupting funding for liberal N.G.O.s that he claimed were promoting violence, while name-checking specific left-leaning foundations like the Ford Foundation and Open Society Foundations, whose founder, George Soros, is a Democratic megadonor. And Democrats were uniformly rattled by the short-lived suspension of Jimmy Kimmel. “We’re not going to make it to the midterms at this rate,” said a Dem strategist. “The harm that has been done is irreparable.”

In short, the challenges continue piling higher and higher—and many Democrats view it as Jeffries’ duty to cleave some sort of path forward. Meanwhile, one source close to Jeffries offered some guidance to the more freaked-out portions of his party: “Don’t despair while the gloves are up.”

Need help? Review our FAQ page or contact us for assistance. For brand partnerships, email ads@puck.news.

You received this email because you signed up to receive emails from Puck, or as part of your Puck account associated with {{customer.email}}. To stop receiving this newsletter and/or manage all your email preferences, click here.

Puck is published by Heat Media LLC. 107 Greenwich St, New York, NY 10006