Kate is out on a much-deserved vacation, so there will be no episode of The Josh Marshall Podcast this week!

We will be back next week, and in the meantime, be sure to check out last week’s live show in honor of TPM’s 25th Anniversary. See you soon!

Over the last couple days I’ve argued both that the denouement of the shutdown standoff was a flub and an embarrassment and also that the overall situation is going reasonably well. This isn’t defending the members of the Democratic caucus. I don’t need to defend or attack them because I’m mostly indifferent to them. I’m looking to a half-dozen year or more time horizon in which almost all the current senators need to be convinced to take a dramatically different approach to politics or purged from the ranks of elected office. Let’s call it Change or Purge. To me, from March to now was a big step forward. The way of operating during this shutdown was very different from what happened in March. And the way it ended — here I know many disagree with me — doesn’t negate what happened during the last five weeks, either in terms of the changed behavior or what was accomplished. This is a multi-course treatment. The results of the first course were encouraging. So, on to the remaining nine.

Since I’ve focused on this Change or Purge framework in this post I’d like to flesh out some of what that means. Of course a lot of this is either characterological or a way of using power. That can be hard to capture in bullet points or outside the context of a specific political situation. But there are a series of things senators support or don’t support that gives a clear indication of whether they are serious about confronting the challenge of the moment or battling back from Trumpism.

I wrote last night’s post fresh off the news that at least eight Democrats had voted to take John Thune’s deal and vote for a continuing resolution, which got essentially none of the demands that had started this fight over. I stand by everything. If anything I feel surer of my impression of this.

There’s a key distinction I was trying to draw in what I wrote. And that is there’s a difference between the deal itself and where the deal leaves Democrats and the broader anti-Trump opposition. This deal shows us that Democrats still don’t have the caucus they need for this fight that will be going on at least through this decade. But the shutdown also accomplished a lot. And not withstanding the WTF fumble at the 10-yard line, it’s still a dramatically different caucus than we had in March. To me it’s a proof of concept that worked. Democratic voters need to keep demanding more, keep up the pressure and keep purging the Senate caucus of senators who are not up to the new reality.

In other words, it’s not defending anything. I’m certainly not happy with how this ended or endorsing anything this caucus did. I’m feeling good about what Democratic voters accomplished in forcing change on the caucus from March until November. So it’s not that Democrats demanded more and this deal isn’t that bad. It’s Democrats already got their representatives to shift a lot, and they need to keep ratcheting up the pressure, purging and reshaping how Democratic elected officials approach the question of power. And another continuing resolution cliff is just around the corner in January. If you haven’t already read my piece from last night, I encourage you to do so.