• 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!

Why Democrats can't agree to give Trump his wall

Excon said:
I see you do not understand the word indirect or how it would apply. Figures.
Click to expand...

I see you have no clue how trade works. Figures.
 
Airyaman said:
I see you have no clue how trade works. Figures.
Click to expand...
Oy vey!
I see you do not understand what comes about from trade revenue.
 
Excon said:
Oy vey!
I see you do not understand what comes about from trade revenue.
Click to expand...

Trade revenue?

What money does the US government get from trade between a US entity and a foreign entity where there are no tariffs or similar taxes?
 
Cardinal said:
While Republicans are trying to make this about a simple matter of "border security" or "who's to blame for the shutdown," there are practical matters for why Democrats can't give Trump his wall.

1)The source of funding for the wall was a lie. Trump supporters will argue that they knew it was a lie, but this demands adhering to the rather...unique...logic that because they were in on the lie this somehow obligates the rest of the country to go along with it. In other words, just because more than one person is in on a con doesn't make it any less of a con. But more to the point, to agree to fund a giant project based on one of the most important aspects of it being a lie simply rewards that lie, and incentivizes the motivation to lie on future projects.

2)Pretty much everything about the wall is a lie, from the artificial sense of urgency surrounding it which spontaneously came into being just as Democrats took control of the House, to the claim that terrorists are flooding across the borders in the thousands, to the claim that immigrants bring disease, to the claim that immigrants are responsible for any meaningful percentage of crime...it's all based on lies. If the wall was a necessary and legitimate need, it wouldn't require lies in its defense. The truth would stand on its own. So as with the above: to agree to fund a giant project based on lies simply rewards those lies, and incentivizes the motivation to lie on future projects.

3)To give Trump his wall proves correct his belief that using Federal workers as pawns is a workable strategy, and he will therefore be sure to repeat the strategy.

4)Similar to the above but even more significant, to provide Trump his wall demonstrates that Trump will be able to demand something unreasonable every time a spending bill is up. Since he will know that Democrats will fold, this will immediately reduce the House to an inferior chamber of Congress (and by extension, an inferior branch of government). Trump will correctly conclude that he could demand anything at all, up to and including the cessation of House oversight over the Executive branch altogether.

5)To give Trump his wall negates Trump's own claim that he owns the shutdown. Why adopt blame for a terrible thing that somebody else has already agreed to shoulder the blame for?

6)Trump has spent so much effort imbuing the wall with racist principles (equating Latinos to vermin, disease, criminals and animals) that for Democrats to agree to a wall necessarily adopts the stink of his racism onto themselves.

7)Trump doesn't even treat the wall issue seriously, so why should Democrats? To date, Trump hasn't landed on a final vision of the wall, hasn't conducted a serious cost analysis of it, can't seem to stick to a single narrative for who will pay for it, and often abandons the wall only to spontaneously make it his prerogative by the end of the day depending on who on Fox News is currently yammering at him. If the wall is such a serious issue, then Trump has treated it as unseriously as possible, and therefore Democrats are not required to treat it as a serious thing that they need to spend a single dollar on.

8)This is technically a political reason and not the most important one, but there's no reason it should be be excluded from the list anyway: Republicans have already lost the public debate on the wall. A majority of the country doesn't see the wall as a priority, doesn't want a shutdown, and they blame the shutdown primarily on Trump and Republicans. Around 32-35% blame Democrats, which is an interesting number because that's a little less than the percentage of the country that comprises Trump's own base. Why should Democrats give in when, as polls are consistently showing, they already won the debate?
Click to expand...
Simple answer is the Dems have spent tons of political capital fighting Trump; to even give him a whiff of success would destroy their hopes for 2020 - simple as that, all your partisan jabberwocky/bull**** above notwithstanding - that's the bottom line.
 
Airyaman said:
Trade revenue?

What money does the US government get from trade between a US entity and a foreign entity where there are no tariffs or similar taxes?
Click to expand...
iLOL Is that where it stops? Gee, who knew?
Stop with the absurdity.
 
Excon said:
iLOL Is that where it stops? Gee, who knew?
Stop with the absurdity.
Click to expand...

So you have no clue?

My shocked face looks surprisingly like my bored face.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
You're in ****ing NZ, so you're not faced with getting evicted, getting your car repo-ed or anything else.
So you can basically stick your nonsensical shots across the bow where the Sun doesn't shine, Skippy.
Nobody who has to work without pay and who can't get extensions on their bills due takes your response seriously.
See ya later, internet tough guy.
Click to expand...
What can I really say about Trump defenders that makes them look any stupider than they already do?
 
MovingPictures said:
What can I really say about Trump defenders that makes them look any stupider than they already do?
Click to expand...
funny, this post actually make you the one looking stupid.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Brutal and sociopathic? How can anybody take your post seriously when it is a melodramatic emotional wreck?
Click to expand...
You don't even know what's going on in this country and how our system works, so nobody really cares what you think.

And if you were taking my post seriously, I would mark it as evidence that I'm wrong.
 
btthegreat said:
"Comedy has to be based on truth.
You take the truth and you put a little curlicue at the end" - Sid Caesar
Click to expand...
Irrelevant quote is irrelevant.
 
Bullseye said:
Simple answer is the Dems have spent tons of political capital fighting Trump; to even give him a whiff of success would destroy their hopes for 2020 - simple as that, all your partisan jabberwocky/bull**** above notwithstanding - that's the bottom line.
Click to expand...
You can be sure that almost none of those Dems that retook the House, ran a campaign on building the wall yet they won those elections with an increase of forty seats. They likely made a very different campaign promise three months ago, both in the primary and general elections in their districts than Donald Trump did two years before. They cannot keep their campaign promise and fulfill Trump's twisted version ( the one where taxpayers are now on the hook) of his campaign promise. Theirs is a more recent mandate. Theirs is consistent with national polling. Theirs respects the republican taxpayer aspiration that a foreign government fund the wall instead of our government. The republican administration is now feeling the consequences of a series of pivotal elections that they lost, and poor polling numbers outside of the party's base.


Here's the bottom line. Political capital spent fighting Trump has provided dividends. Dems are not about to stop a winning tactical plan. Obstruction of Trump, appears to be what voters wanted and rewarded, in those districts that went Democratic.
 
Last edited:
Excon said:
Irrelevant quote is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
It is relevant to your post which referred to writing comedy rather than the wall or political promises . You just did not appreciate the direction it pointed towards.
Your post was not relevant to the topic or the quoted material, but I brought it back on topic for you with Sid Caesar's quote referencing truth.


You are welcome.
 
Last edited:
Excon said:
No it wasn't as it isn't true.
Had it been true, then sure.
Click to expand...
Its as 'true' as most aphorisms are intended to be. They are broadly generalized ad very brief statements that are designed to encapsulate a truism, often with irony, wit. The most condensed version of literatary truth or meaning the creative mind has produced.


You need to read more, in less dry or literal formats.
 
Excon said:
Not at all.
Click to expand...
Most definitely. The fact you cannot appreciate its value, is indicative of your limitations.

We could do this all night, like two 12 year olds but my sleep is more important than responding to your lazy ass, empty, substance less comments.
 
btthegreat said:
Most definitely. The fact you cannot appreciate its value,

We can do this all night.
Click to expand...
1. Wrong.
It is not true.
2. You are making assumptions about what I can appreciate or not, and is thus indicative or your limitations.

3. We? You have a gerbil too?

4. All night? If the "we" includes me, I decide what I do all night.
 
Excon said:
1. Wrong.
It is not true.
2. You are making assumptions about what I can appreciate or not, and is thus indicative or your limitations.

3. We? You have a gerbil too?

4. All night? If the "we" includes me, I decide what I do all night.
Click to expand...

1. You are wrong. I am right. 2. Gerbils are irrelevant. 3. You replaced a verb phrase in my post 'can do' with a simple verb 'do' , changing the context and meaning from the original. My statement was completely consistent with yours. I know what I wrote, and each word had an intended purpose. Your choices and autonomy were not an issue. Had I intended them to be, I would not have picked the
verb phrase 'can do'.

We can still do this all night but I don't want to.
 
Last edited:
btthegreat said:
You can be sure that almost none of those Dems that retook the House, ran a campaign on building the wall yet they won those elections with an increase of forty seats. They likely made a very different campaign promise three months ago, both in the primary and general elections in their districts than Donald Trump did two years before. They cannot keep their campaign promise and fulfill Trump's twisted version ( the one where taxpayers are now on the hook) of his campaign promise. Theirs is a more recent mandate. Theirs is consistent with national polling. Theirs respects the republican taxpayer aspiration that a foreign government fund the wall instead of our government. The republican administration is now feeling the consequences of a series of pivotal elections that they lost, and poor polling numbers outside of the party's base.


Here's the bottom line. Political capital spent fighting Trump has provided dividends. Dems are not about to stop a winning tactical plan. Obstruction of Trump, appears to be what voters wanted and rewarded, in those districts that went Democratic.
Click to expand...
Just keep telling yourself that. Please.
 
mike2810 said:
Why should the funding of "the wall" hold up funds for agencies that have nothing to do with "the wall". For example funding for the National Park Service or Forest Service.
Click to expand...

Maybe because he is considering to use the trees for the wall?
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
You're not an expert on anything so long as you live in New Zealand. You're visiting right now.





"Over a five-year period ending 2016, a little over half a million Mexicans illegally entered the U.S. through the southern border. That was down from 2.05 million during five years ending 2007, according to Pew. "


---Net migration of Mexicans is actually negative these days.

"While there has been an increase in Central American migrants arriving at the southern border recently, a vast majority have claimed asylum, a legal mode of immigration, said Capps."

---Trump, and apparently you as well, are conveniently lumping refugees seeking asylum, and illegal immigrants together into one group. FAIL.



---You ****ing live in ****ing New Zealand. Butt out.
Click to expand...

Naw... as an American citizen with voting rights and that has probably lived here longer than you and knows more illegals than you and has been to Mexico more than you and knows more about this that you... nope. I will vote and influence people to my hearts content...
 
MovingPictures said:
You don't even know what's going on in this country and how our system works, so nobody really cares what you think.

And if you were taking my post seriously, I would mark it as evidence that I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

Explain why I don't know what is going on in "this country"...

As an American that has a huge family in America and that I spend two months in America each year not to mention I lived in SoCal for over 35 years and worked with illegals and taught illegals... etc... how is it that you are so sure as to state that I don't even know what is going on in this country... not to mention there is this thing called that World Wide Web that was recently invented that allows people to learn about things going on far away... you know what... more ellipses... that is about the extent of what you can handle in your posts... :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom