• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Federal government shuts down after Senate talks fail

MateoMtnClimber said:
That's not quite right. House Republicans won the popular vote by less than 1.4 million votes. Clinton won the popular vote by more than 2.8 million votes. That's an appreciable difference. Still, the Democrat won one way and the Republicans won the other way.

I did not say that presidential elections are more useful than House elections in forecasting the results of future elections. I think they both have their uses. Representatives tend to be gerrymandered and are usually heavily favored incumbents. Presidential elections are obviously very different.

As the 2016 election showed us, past elections are not always indicative of future elections. The 2018 elections might also be a surprise - in any number of ways.
Click to expand...

MateoMtnClimber said:
Please see post # 1216. I know you guys like to distort facts all the time, but this little gem will not stand. You'll never understand the whole story if you just let Sean Hannity read you the Cliff's Notes.
Click to expand...


I am trying to provide substance to your claim. you stated Hilary "WON" the popular vote by 2.8 million WHICH she did in fact. The questions though Begs why she LOST the Electoral, which is why we have TRUMP as a president.

By winning the majority votes in California of 4.4million Where was here NET loss of 1.6million additional Popular votes? Means she LOST more votes in other states than she won, in addition to the Electoral. So the lion share was BY majority one state and one state alone..... So was it "really" the popular vote that she won? Or she just WON a single state with the MOST votes per state..... meaning she didnt really win the popular vote per say, she just won a bulk of VOTES from the largest state


What does this all have to do with the shut down. The liberals in California are partially the push to DACA and sanctuary and all this other blah blah BS.... I think Ben Shapiro Stated it... "Facts dont care about your feelings" sorry my friend!
 
Last edited:
Exactice said:
I am trying to provide substance to your claim. you stated Hilary "WON" the popular vote by 2.8 million WHICH she did in fact. The questions though Begs why she LOST the Electoral, which is why we have TRUMP as a president.

By winning the majority votes in California of 4.4million Where was here NET loss of 1.6million additional Popular votes? Means she LOST more votes in other states than she won, in addition to the Electoral. So the lion share was BY majority one state and one state alone..... So was it "really" the popular vote that she won? Or she just WON a single state with the MOST votes per state..... meaning she didnt really win the popular vote per say, she just won a bulk of VOTES from the largest state


What does this all have to do with the shut down. The liberals in California are partially the push to DACA and sanctuary and all this other blah blah BS.... I think Ben Shapiro Stated it... "Facts dont care about your feelings" sorry my friend!
Click to expand...

Sure, let's arbitrarily toss out votes from the largest blue state.

Flip Texas from Red to Blue and Hillary won the election!!

I know, let's just delete Republican votes from a couple select states that tipped the election. See? Hillary won!!
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
Sanders is only an independent because socialist is a four-letter word in the US. But he is the wisest man in American politics.

And the president does not have the support of half of our country. It's between 35% and 40%.
Click to expand...

The USA is socialist. Americans who have maintained their hardon for socialism, need to get over it, as it must be painful...
Sanders should be in the Whitehouse right now.

As for your poll numbers...he won the election when all the polls said there was no way he could. I wouldn't place too much trust in those polls.
 
tres borrachos said:
Would you mind posting something that backs that bolded part up, please?
Click to expand...

As I just said...he won ~50% of the votes.
NOBODY and no poll said he would win.
But go ahead and trust the polls if you like.
 
Exactice said:
I am trying to provide substance to your claim. you stated Hilary "WON" the popular vote by 2.8 million WHICH she did in fact. The questions though Begs why she LOST the Electoral, which is why we have TRUMP as a president.

By winning the majority votes in California of 4.4million Where was here NET loss of 1.6million additional Popular votes? Means she LOST more votes in other states than she won, in addition to the Electoral. So the lion share was BY majority one state and one state alone..... So was it "really" the popular vote that she won? Or she just WON a single state with the MOST votes per state..... meaning she didnt really win the popular vote per say, she just won a bulk of VOTES from the largest state


What does this all have to do with the shut down. The liberals in California are partially the push to DACA and sanctuary and all this other blah blah BS.... I think Ben Shapiro Stated it... "Facts dont care about your feelings" sorry my friend!
Click to expand...

The president won the popular vote in 30 states. Clinton won the popular vote in 20 states and DC. They each had bigger pluses in some states and bigger minuses in other states. She didn't win only in CA. This is not the thread for this discussion, so I'll just leave the Wiki link here. There's a state by state chart where you can see it in greater detail.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2016
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
That's a dishonest way of presenting what happened. The president won the popular vote in 30 states. Clinton won the popular vote in 20 states and DC. Clinton's margin of victory nationally was smaller than her margin of victory in CA, but she won the popular vote in 21 jursidictions, not one.

If you want to talk about why that's not fair or relevant, I will take that conversation all day. After all, the only reason that CA's votes were diluted was because of the Electoral College. That's the thing that put the current president in the WH.
Click to expand...

Fletch said:
Its not even remotely dishonest. It is a fact.
Click to expand...

That's even more dishonest. You clipped my post where I explained why you were wrong and then told me again that your mistake is a fact? Come on, man.

I included my full comment again for context. On this Wiki page you will see how Clinton lost 30 states, not 49 states.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2016
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
That's even more dishonest. You clipped my post where I explained why you were wrong and then told me again that your mistake is a fact? Come on, man.

I included my full comment again for context. On this Wiki page you will see how Clinton lost 30 states, not 49 states.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2016
Click to expand...

I clipped your comment because the rest was irrelevant. I didn't say she lost 49 states. I said she lost the remaining 49 states by over a million votes. That is fact
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
We shouldn't "automatically" give them anything, and your statement reflects an intellectual laziness that smacks of a dishonest agenda which bears no relation to the reality for many of these people. You're bringing elements of the "welfare queen" argument to bear against people who have often sent their children to college and who have made a productive life and who have contributed to this nation.
That, together with your broad brush sweep against "democrats who don't have any common sense" really doesn't dignify the benefit of a response, but here it is:

With an attitude like that, I'd sooner take them and deport your kind.
In a New York Minute.
And I bet they can spell and define "waive" better than you can, too.
They are indeed asking for a waiver, because many of these "dreamers" have damn well earned it.
Some have even fought and bled for this country.

But I find myself wondering if you'd even give a dreamer veteran a fighting chance.
My gut says you'd throw them under the bus, too.
Click to expand...

I would give a dreamer veteran a full ride to citizenship


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
TheRepublican said:
I would give a dreamer veteran a full ride to citizenship


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

One might think that was a foregone conclusion on the part of both parties.
Unfortunately it's not.
It USED to be. My father was drafted while still an alien resident refugee fleeing Hitler, having been smuggled to NYC in the belly of a freighter in 1937. He wound up right back in Germany again, and ultimately took two Nazi bullets to the neck.
His revenge: He went on to invent pulsed power, nuclear hardening of military and enterprise level mission critical electronics, and the RF permeamater.
Air Force One (among other things) is protected from EMP thanks to his work.
 
Last edited:
jmotivator said:
Except that is is a budgetary matter and SHOULD be included in budgetary bills like, oh, a continuing resolution? :roll:
Click to expand...

...and, budgets should be approved prior to 10/1....and not CR'ed a half a dozen times. When congress returns to regular order THEN you can be outraged by things that are not in regular order.
 
gdgyva said:
you've been spending too much time with your liberal friends out in Washington

either you believe in the rule of law, or you dont

and i hate all the bull**** excuses people come up with for these individuals....

did your mom and dad teach you right from wrong? it is a very easy concept....

their parents did WRONG....but these adults did nothing to fix the situation....so yes, i hold them accountable also

when there is a will, there is usually a way....there was NO WILL to make this right....they just kept hoping that the laws would change
Click to expand...

LOL So you wanted them to self deport to a country they have never known because their parents came here to find work and were successful enough to stay.? What about the Americans who benefitted from that work? Aren't they really to blame for their parents coming here in the first place? You must really hate hard working families who want to better themselves. You call yourself an American?
 
Last edited:
PIPEWRENCH said:
I don't want a law telling the world the way to achieve immigration status and citizenship is to break our laws. Is there anything more stupid than this. What this country needs are laws closing the loopholes and stopping sneaky lawless people from circumventing our immigration laws.
Click to expand...
So what do you do with those kids & young adults?


They are here illegally so they need to see a judge have their day in court and get the law breaking part of this resolved. Then they need to apply for immigration status and be given a temporary visa to continue working and living in this country legally. I have filled out paperwork for employees decades ago to submit in order for them to extend their work/college visa. I don't know where or who he submitted the paperwork to but his visa was always approved or extended because we did it legally. Whether it was a judge or whoever that makes the determination every thing was legal. That is the key here. Legal immigration. We need to stop rewarding bad behavior in this country. It is not only stupid but will definitely be the downfall of this country.
Click to expand...
You can't apply for immigrant status, when you've been brought here illegally.
 
jmotivator said:
Well, no, the smart move is to not block the federal budget over illegal aliens altogether. They can win or lose that as a policy bill, not shoehorn it in to a budget bill.
Click to expand...
I can understand these sentiments.

But this is the way our founders set-up the system. The Dems did nothing unconstitutional or non-procedural. It is within their prerogative to cast a vote as yea or nay; that's why it's a"'vote". In the end, the ultimate determinate of their actions is by the will of the people, i.e. at the polls.
 
Chomsky said:
I can understand these sentiments.

But this is the way our founders set-up the system. The Dems did nothing unconstitutional or non-procedural. It is within their prerogative to cast a vote as yea or nay; that's why it's a"'vote". In the end, the ultimate determinate of their actions is by the will of the people, i.e. at the polls.
Click to expand...

I understand that. I am speaking in a political sense. They didn't calculate the optics of this play well, or even sanely.
 
upsideguy said:
...and, budgets should be approved prior to 10/1....and not CR'ed a half a dozen times. When congress returns to regular order THEN you can be outraged by things that are not in regular order.
Click to expand...

LOL. Tell me about it. So when was the last full budget passed and signed into law again?
 
ludin said:
You evidently do not know what iron pyrite is go figure.
Ps a democrat has never given me any wealth or prosperity.
Click to expand...

Wise man's gold. Forced health care for everyone. $2,500 medical a year. Yes...you too can be saved.
 
Buzz62 said:
As I just said...he won ~50% of the votes.
NOBODY and no poll said he would win.
But go ahead and trust the polls if you like.
Click to expand...

No, what you said was this:

But he has the staunch support of close to half of the US population

I asked you to post something that shows me that he has the staunch support of close to half the US population. Talking about the November 2016 election polls is something that I know Trump loves to do, but this is a debate board about the current events. It's January 2018, and the election polls of 2016 aren't current events.

Please post something that shows that over 110 million people "staunchly" support the President today. Thanks in advance.
 
tres borrachos said:
No, what you said was this:

But he has the staunch support of close to half of the US population

I asked you to post something that shows me that he has the staunch support of close to half the US population. Talking about the November 2016 election polls is something that I know Trump loves to do, but this is a debate board about the current events. It's January 2018, and the election polls of 2016 aren't current events.

Please post something that shows that over 110 million people "staunchly" support the President today. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Like I said...go ahead and believe the polls you read.
Just like you did last time...
 
Buzz62 said:
Like I said...go ahead and believe the polls you read.
Just like you did last time...
Click to expand...

You're the one who made the statement. It's up to you to back it up. Polls from 2016 aren't relevant to what we're discussing today. Either back up your claim, or admit you made it up. This isn't hard.
 
tres borrachos said:
You're the one who made the statement. It's up to you to back it up. Polls from 2016 aren't relevant to what we're discussing today. Either back up your claim, or admit you made it up. This isn't hard.
Click to expand...

I do...no matter what your polls say.
Just like the election polls...you think Trump's done for because of them.
I can hardly wait to see y'all scream at the moon again.
 
Buzz62 said:
I do...no matter what your polls say.
Just like the election polls...you think Trump's done for because of them.
I can hardly wait to see y'all scream at the moon again.
Click to expand...

I didn't say anything about polls. I asked you to back up your claim. Now you're talking about screaming at the moon? I have no idea what you're babbling about. Stay on topic.

You said that he has the "staunch support" of almost half of the US population. Either you made that up, or you have something to back it up. Post the proof, or admit you made it up. This isn't hard.
 
Blue_State said:
Wise man's gold. Forced health care for everyone. $2,500 medical a year. Yes...you too can be saved.
Click to expand...

no iron pyrite is fools gold which exactly what obamcare was.
 
tres borrachos said:
I didn't say anything about polls. I asked you to back up your claim. Now you're talking about screaming at the moon? I have no idea what you're babbling about. Stay on topic.
Click to expand...
I can't put it any simpler. If you can't understand, try reading out loud.

tres borrachos said:
You said that he has the "staunch support" of almost half of the US population. Either you made that up, or you have something to back it up. Post the proof, or admit you made it up. This isn't hard.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom