This commonly used expression couldn’t be more expressive for describing having to make a choice between two undesirable options. When this uncomfortable position occurs in our lives, it is terribly difficult to know which of the two difficult options is the best choice.
This is exactly the situation that occurred last week for two Democratic leaders Chuck Schumer, the Senate Minority Leader. and Hakeem Jeffries, the Leader of the House Democratic Caucus. These two leaders were faced with the choice of passing or opposing certain legislation.
Here’s what happened: Each year, by law, the President submits a detailed budget to the Congress for the next fiscal year. Donald Trump’s 2025 budget faced immediate and tremendous criticism due to its proposed $13 billion cuts to non-defense programs, like Medicaid, food assistance and veteran’s benefits, while increasing defense spending by $6 billion.
The proposed cuts sparked division – not just between the Republican and Democratic parties, but also within the Democratic party itself. Jeffries opposed the bill, viewing it as an unacceptable concession that endangered vital social programs. He sought to rally Democrats to publicly resist Trump’s policies. Schumer chose to support the GOP-backed funding bill. He believed that avoiding a government shutdown was critical, as it would give Trump even more power to reshape federal operations. By voting for the bill, Schumer aimed to maintain control and prevent further destabilization, even though the bill included cuts to social programs.
Both options had significant downsides: Schumer’s choice risked alienating progressives and conceding to harmful cuts, while Jeffries’ stance risked a shutdown with potentially greater consequences. Both leaders were justified in their perspectives on the political landscape, but ultimately, only one path could be chosen. Schumer, along with nine other Democrats, voted in favor of the bill. Meanwhile the public is becoming more aware of the challenging situation.
Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries have generally maintained a cooperative relationship as leaders of the Democratic Party, but their differing political styes became evident during the recent funding debate. Schumer, a seasoned pragmatist, tends to prioritize compromise and strategic concessions to achieve immediate goals. Jeffries, on the other hand, represents a more assertive and principled approach, emphasizing the importance of standing firm against policies that threaten social programs and vulnerable communities. Despite these differences, both leaders share a commitment to advancing the party’s broader agenda.
   #57 THU SAG 11/23/1950 Chuck Schumer |   #29 TUE LEO 8/4/1970 Hakeem Jeffries |
  #25 TUE ARI 3/26/1940 Nancy Pelosi |
Chuck Schumer was born on a Thursday in Sagittarius. Jupiter is the ruler of both his Inner and Outer natures. He has a relatively easy time making decisions because his two selves are generally in agreement in how he should feel and act. He may be sometimes judged as making the wrong decision, but he knows that his intentions and his action were in agreement.
Hakeem Jeffries was born on a Tuesday in Leo. Mars rules his INNER SELF and the Sun governs his OUTER SELF. Inwardly he is a true warrior but outwardly he is often concerned with doing the right thing and maintaining a good personal impression. Consequently he senses a division in in regard to these two intentions and may feel to need to sacrifice one motivation for the other.
Nancy Pelosi was born on a Tuesday in Aries. Mars rules her INNER and OUTER Selves. She is daring and bold, and consequently loved or hated, depending upon if you are with or against her. She has represented California’s 11th congressional district since 1987, and served as the speaker of the House of Representative for two terms. Her political power is legendary.
These three political figures form a powerful triad in the Democratic party. Schumer, as a long-time Senate leader, worked closely with Pelosi during her tenure as Speaker, particularly on major legislative efforts like the Affordable Care Act and pandemic relief. Jeffries, on the other hand, was mentored by Pelosi as he rose through the ranks of the House. Pelosi has strategically moved into the background as Jeffries has taken on more responsibilities. And it is noted that Pelosi expressed private disappointment with Schumer for supporting the Republican measure.
The Mars emphasis in the Dayology Signatures of Pelosi and Jeffries invites a good fight, whereas the double Jupiter in Chuck Schumer’s Signature prefers to offer his wisdom.
While these three figures are as different as they can be, they all share a certain drive which helps them see past obstacles and create new opportunities. The Element of Fire feeds their Aries, Leo and Sagittarius Sun Signs with intense passion for their political roles. They would be wise to regroup and attempt to understand what they are up against regarding the Republican plans. This will not be the last time they will be placed between “a rock and a hard place.”
