The recent US government shutdown, which began on October 1, 2025 and ultimately ended on November 12, 2025, was the longest in history and points to several major and intensifying trends in US politics such as deepening political polarization and hostility, the increased use of fiscal instability as a political tool, and increasing conflict over the executive versus legislative balance of power.
The most striking trend is the extent to which the partisan divide has intensified, creating a “bad faith” between the two major parties, Democrats and Republicans. Unlike previous shutdowns, which often included late-night bipartisan talks, the recent one reportedly focused on an almost complete lack of cooperation and blame-game. It appears that both Democrats and Republicans believe there is political value in “digging in” and refusing to compromise, even if the negative impact on federal employees and the public is increasing. This suggests a political environment where partisan victory is prioritized over functional governance.
Government shutdowns have become a more regular feature of American politics, turning the annual appropriations process from a routine legislative duty into a high-stakes political conflict. The 2025 shutdown was seen by some within the Trump administration as a “strategic opening” or “unprecedented opportunity” to achieve policy goals – specifically, reducing 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 suspension of environmental permits and patent approvals – indicates a trend where 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 conflict between the two parties within the legislature. The Democrats’ second demand, beyond health care subsidies, was to rein in President Trump’s use of executive powers to revoke or withhold funding approved by Congress. This points to a tendency for the executive branch to test the limits of its authority over fiscal operations. The inability of Congress to pass basic funding bills in a timely manner underscores both internal divisions within the parties (for example, radical Republicans were initially opposed to a temporary bill) and a broader legislative dysfunction, which transfers more power to the President and agency heads to manage during the crisis. In short, the recent shutdown reflects a political system where ideological rigidity and declining trust have made basic governance increasingly difficult, relying on crisis points to force outcomes rather than compromise and deliberation.
The recent US government shutdown in 2025 has highlighted several key aspects of Donald Trump’s political approach and influence, primarily his willingness to engage in high-risk destabilization and his strong commitment to his policy priorities, even at the cost of significant public disruption. The first of these is a Willingness to use the shutdown as leverage. The shutdown began when Congress failed to pass appropriations legislation, primarily due to an impasse over the expiration of expanded Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies, a key Democratic priority. Trump and the Republican-controlled House used the funding default as leverage in negotiations, demonstrating a strategy of standing firm on fiscal issues and entitlement cuts regardless of the consequences.
Another important aspect is Trump’s concern Focus on restructuring the government. The final deal included a provision that temporarily limits the president’s ability to fire federal employees until Jan. 30, 2026. This suggests that broad restructuring of the federal workforce was a likely goal, indicating his administration’s interest in increasing the efficiency and control of the executive power, which critics argue leads to an overreach of authority.
The bandh also demonstrated centralized decision making. The shutdown talks were reportedly driven by back-and-forth between congressional leaders and the President, with Trump making significant interventions via social media to dictate Republican strategy, such as calling for a “nuclear option” to end the Senate filibuster. This indicates a leadership style focused on direct control and a willingness to circumvent legislative norms to achieve one’s objectives.
Trump initially took a hardline stance, but ultimately supported the bipartisan agreement that ended the shutdown, calling it a “huge victory”. This shift suggests a pragmatic approach to mitigating political and economic damage when the public impact (e.g., flight disruptions, loss of food aid) became too severe, while simultaneously claiming victory for one’s party’s message.
While many agencies were affected, the deal left some departments, such as Veterans Affairs and Agriculture, fully funded 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 signaled Trump’s brand of populist, confrontational politics, where established legislative processes are challenged in the pursuit of policy goals and political victories, regardless of the disruption to government services and American citizens.
Recent polls from November 2025 indicate that Donald Trump’s popularity is declining, with declining approval ratings among the general public, including Republicans and key demographics such as Hispanic and youth voters. Many surveys show a continuous declining trend. Recent CNN/SSRS poll indicated approval ratings 37%, which is the lowest for any president in his second term at this point in history. Other aggregators put their approval around 41-42%. Disapproval ratings are high, with a CNN survey showing 63% disapproval, a figure almost identical to their all-time low recorded in January 2021.
Trump’s approval has declined significantly throughout 2025, starting at 47% in January and falling by about 10 percentage points by November. The primary driver of the decline is public dissatisfaction with the economy, including disappointment over its 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 declined, from 91% at the time of his inauguration to about 68–79% in recent polls. His standing among Hispanic adults and youth voters has deteriorated significantly since the beginning 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 decline in public support and increasing voter frustration. Current polling data suggests a significant shift in public opinion, with a majority of Americans expressing disapproval of his job performance on a number of issues.
Recent state elections held on November 4 and 5, 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 scored significant victories in these states, such as Abigail Spanberger becoming the first female governor in Virginia and Congresswoman Mickey Sherrill’s victory by double-digit margins in New Jersey. These victories were largely seen as a “blue wave” response to the president.
Zoharan Mamdani, a progressive Democratic socialist, was also elected mayor of New York City, a victory widely seen as a victory despite strong opposition from Trump. Mamdani’s victory made him the city’s first Muslim, South Asian and youngest mayor in more than a century. Trump, a New York native, 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 rent freezes for rent-stabilized apartments, free public buses, and city-operated grocery stores, which resonated with working-class voters. He focused on these concrete issues rather than on larger 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 victories in New Jersey and Virginia, was interpreted by many analysts as an important symbolic defeat for Trump and an early indicator of voter sentiment ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. As Mamdani said after his victory and directly challenging the president: “If anyone can show a country betrayed by Donald Trump how to defeat him, it is the city that gave birth to him”.
This article is written by Prabhu Dayal, former Ambassador of New Delhi.
