• 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!

Can a government shutdown be avoided?

Trump just needs to cave on his dumb asks and the government will stay open.

WASHINGTON—Not a single member of Congress who represents the territory on the southwest border said they support President Donald Trump’s request for $1.4 billion to begin construction of his promised wall, according to a Wall Street Journal survey, testing the administration’s ability to reach a deal on government funding next week.

Most lawmakers representing the region—both Democrats and Republicans—said they are opposed and many said they have unanswered questions. A few were noncommittal, but not a single member of the House or Senate representing the region expressed support for the funding request. That includes nine members of the House and eight senators across four states: Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California.
Click to expand...

It would take incredible incompetence for a party with total control of the federal government to fail to keep the government open.
 
Mac77 said:
https://politicalwire.com/2017/04/18/can-trump-avoid-government-shutdown/

I don't see why we have to shut the government down since republicans control congress and the white house

Just use the nuclear option in the senate and move on

Its really very simple
Click to expand...

How would that fix a problem caused by Senate republicant border state opposition to Trump's great wall "plan". Like many Trump "plans", the border wall idea (which is not really a plan) lacks sufficient detail to toss billions into making "it" happen.

The same is true for the "TrumpCare" plan (actually only a vague "big picture" idea) to "cover everybody" with something really great, fantastic and amazing which will (somehow) be "affordable". The concept of spending less to cover everybody sounds absolutely wonderful but soon falls apart when folks are asked (commanded?) to write that into the form of federal law.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
How would that fix a problem caused by Senate republicant border state opposition to Trump's great wall "plan". Like many Trump "plans", the border wall idea (which is not really a plan) lacks sufficient detail to toss billions into making "it" happen.

The same is true for the "TrumpCare" plan (actually only a vague "big picture" idea) to "cover everybody" with something really great, fantastic and amazing which will (somehow) be "affordable". The concept of spending less to cover everybody sounds absolutely wonderful but soon falls apart when folks are asked (commanded?) to write that into the form of federal law.
Click to expand...

You mean John "Just build the dang wall" McCain?

I never know what to expect from him

But obama refused to sign a budget that didnt include funding for obamacare and tepublicans caved in to him

If the republican establishment in congress is determined to undermine trump by denying him anything he does not have to sign their legislation

and that will end the reelection hopes of many republicans in 2018 before it hurts trump in 2020
 
Last edited:
Greenbeard said:
Trump just needs to cave on his dumb asks and the government will stay open.



It would take incredible incompetence for a party with total control of the federal government to fail to keep the government open.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
I read this on twitter..Too funny!

21h
Rogue POTUS Staff‏ @RoguePOTUSStaff
POTUS doesn't understand why you can't force a shutdown to blame Dems when GOP controls both houses of Congress.
Click to expand...
 
ttwtt78640 said:
How would that fix a problem caused by Senate republicant border state opposition to Trump's great wall "plan". f

The same is true for the "TrumpCare" plan (actually only a vague "big picture" idea) to "cover everybody" with something really great, fantastic and amazing which will (somehow) be "affordable". The concept of spending less to cover everybody sounds absolutely wonderful but soon falls apart when folks are asked (commanded?) to write that into the form of federal law.
Click to expand...

What you really mean is that trump has failed to convince you that the border wall is a good idea

But thats not surprising since you didnt begin with an open mind in the first place

And I know there are many republicans in congress who think the same way

But if your side wants any changes in immigration policy that you want you will have to give up something in teturn
 
RabidAlpaca said:
So you're saying it's definitely going to happen? ;)
Click to expand...

The republicans in congress are showing incredible incompetence

I didnt think it was possible but they have reached new lows
 
Mac77 said:
What you really mean is that trump has failed to convince you that the border wall is a good idea

But thats not surprising since you didnt begin with an open mind in the first place

And I know there are many republicans in congress who think the same way

But if your side wants any changes in immigration policy that you want you will have to give up something in teturn
Click to expand...

The idea is fine and will likely help stop some border jumpers but, at best, it does nothing about illegal overstays which now account for about 40% of our current 12 million illegal aliens. Once the border is declared secure (in maybe 4 years?) then we "must" accept amnesty which means we are stuck with millions more "suddenly legal" alien residents, along with their relatives and offspring, to support.

Exclusive - Trump border 'wall' to cost $21.6 billion, take 3.5 years to build: internal report | Reuters

Feds Move to Obtain Land for Trump Border Wall
 
Last edited:
"I don't see why we have to shut the government down since republicans control congress and the white house

Just use the nuclear option in the senate and move on

Its really very simple" M7 #1
"Shutting down the government in my view is not conservative policy. I don't think a two week paid vacation for federal employees is conservative policy.
A number of us were saying back in July that this [government shutdown] strategy could not and would not work. And of course, it didn't. So there'll not be another government shutdown. You can count on that." Sen. McConnell (R-KY) CBS-TV Face The Nation 13/10/20, after Republicans received the blame for the pevious shut-down
Click to expand...
[sear rant]
a) I don't know any other nation with a federal debt ceiling.

b) As a rabid deficit hawk I vehemently oppose deficit spending.
AND !!
If the debt ceiling would actually serve as a limit to federal (congressional) spending, I'd be all for it.

BUT !!

It never has! And probably never will.

So it's an annoyance, a distraction. It has our MOC faddiddling with the $ceiling when they should be dealing with:
- balancing the budget
- paying off the debt
- etc.

Instead they're doing this pointless, self-imposed busy-work.

I would be SPECTACULARLY impressed if the Republicans showed some backbone, and not merely slapped a fresh bandaid on it; but showed some onion and dispensed with the debt ceiling entirely. Not just raise the ceiling, but eliminate it completely; with an explicit resolve to accomplish its intended purpose, instead of valiantly brandishing their failures.
[/sear rant]
 
Can a government shutdown be avoided?
Click to expand...

i doubt that Republicans will shut down the government when they control all of it.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The idea is fine and will likely help stop some border jumpers but, at best, it does nothing about illegal overstays which now account for about 40% of our current 12 million illegal aliens. Once the border is declared secure (in maybe 4 years?) then we "must" accept amnesty which means we are stuck with millions more "suddenly legal" alien residents, along with their relatives and offspring, to support.

Exclusive - Trump border 'wall' to cost $21.6 billion, take 3.5 years to build: internal report | Reuters

Feds Move to Obtain Land for Trump Border Wall
Click to expand...

I understand thst the wall does nothing to prevent 40% of the illegal alien problem

But fixing 60% of a problem is a pretty good place to start

We do not have to accept blanket amnesty for all

That remains to be negotiated

I would offer no more than a green card to illegals with very high standards

Which means criminals, high school dropouts, welfare receiptents and people unemployed would not be allowed to stay

But of course my ideas are not official and the final agreement might be more generous
 
Last edited:
sear said:
"I don't see why we have to shut the government down since republicans control congress and the white house

Just use the nuclear option in the senate and move on

Its really very simple" M7 #1

[sear rant]
a) I don't know any other nation with a federal debt ceiling.

b) As a rabid deficit hawk I vehemently oppose deficit spending.
AND !!
If the debt ceiling would actually serve as a limit to federal (congressional) spending, I'd be all for it.

BUT !!

It never has! And probably never will.

So it's an annoyance, a distraction. It has our MOC faddiddling with the $ceiling when they should be dealing with:
- balancing the budget
- paying off the debt
- etc.

Instead they're doing this pointless, self-imposed busy-work.

I would be SPECTACULARLY impressed if the Republicans showed some backbone, and not merely slapped a fresh bandaid on it; but showed some onion and dispensed with the debt ceiling entirely. Not just raise the ceiling, but eliminate it completely; with an explicit resolve to accomplish its intended purpose, instead of valiantly brandishing their failures.
[/sear rant]
Click to expand...

If they didnt have the debt ceiling the nationsl drbg might br 40 trillion instead of thr current $20 tri it is now
 
M7 #13

Oh?
I wasn't aware the debt ceiling even slowed U.S. federal spending a little.
To the contrary.
IIRC what I've read of it indicated these brinkmanship exercises actually $cost $US.

In any case, I seriously doubt it's cut the U.S. debt in half.
 
PS
The Hill
Top Trump officials push border wall as government shutdown looms
The Hill - ‎1 hour ago‎

President Trump and top administration officials emphasized the necessity of funding the president's proposed wall along the country's southern border on Sunday, as talk of a possible government shutdown ramps up.
Click to expand...
The Republicans took it on the chin when the Democrats held sway, and the government shut down due to Republican obstructionism.

Well:

This is the final week for the Republican controlled U.S. federal government to avoid a government shutdown.

Clearly it is in the GOP's self-interest to demonstrate they can be more than "the party of [HELL!] NO!!".

BUT !!

It may not be as easy as might have been thought.

a) The Republicans didn't support Obama's budget.
And the Democrats are now poised to reciprocate the (dis)courtesy, and not support Trump's.

b) The Republicans would need 60 votes in the senate to avoid a government shutdown, and reportedly they don't have them.

c) Trump took a drubbing on his promise to repeal and replace Obamacare, a promise Trump broke (due to his commitment to do it very early in his administration. The time window Trump set for himself has already closed).
To soothe that wound, Trump wants a political victory, and wants the shutdown prevention bill congress passes to include funding for his border wall.

BUT !!

Trump said Mexico would pay for the wall. So if that's true, why must congress allocate $money for it?

The Democrats don't want to approve that spending priority. And there are some Republicans that don't want to either.

Something's got to give. And President Trump doesn't seem to be a likely candidate for such flexibility.

So are we careening toward yet another Republican U.S. federal government shutdown? It may be more likely than we thought.
 
sear said:
PS

The Republicans took it on the chin when the Democrats held sway, and the government shut down due to Republican obstructionism.

Well:

This is the final week for the Republican controlled U.S. federal government to avoid a government shutdown.

Clearly it is in the GOP's self-interest to demonstrate they can be more than "the party of [HELL!] NO!!".

BUT !!

It may not be as easy as might have been thought.

a) The Republicans didn't support Obama's budget.
And the Democrats are now poised to reciprocate the (dis)courtesy, and not support Trump's.

b) The Republicans would need 60 votes in the senate to avoid a government shutdown, and reportedly they don't have them.

c) Trump took a drubbing on his promise to repeal and replace Obamacare, a promise Trump broke (due to his commitment to do it very early in his administration. The time window Trump set for himself has already closed).
To soothe that wound, Trump wants a political victory, and wants the shutdown prevention bill congress passes to include funding for his border wall.

BUT !!

Trump said Mexico would pay for the wall. So if that's true, why must congress allocate $money for it?

The Democrats don't want to approve that spending priority. And there are some Republicans that don't want to either.

Something's got to give. And President Trump doesn't seem to be a likely candidate for such flexibility.

So are we careening toward yet another Republican U.S. federal government shutdown? It may be more likely than we thought.
Click to expand...

Only if the republicans insist on shooting themselves in the foot

They can suspemd the 60 vote rule and pass the budget with a simple majority
 
"They can suspemd the 60 vote rule and pass the budget with a simple majority" M7 #16
Click to expand...
Ah yes. The so called "nuclear option".

Haven't they already done that? W/ Gorsuch?

Don't you find this ruse a tad conspicuous?

It's a rule.

BUT !!

It's a rule that doesn't bind Republicans on issues that are important to them?

Do you REALLY think the Democrats aren't smart enough to play that game too?

NOPE! I consider the U.S. senate's 60 vote super-majority rule a dead duck.
 
sear said:
Ah yes. The so called "nuclear option".

Haven't they already done that? W/ Gorsuch?

Don't you find this ruse a tad conspicuous?

It's a rule.

BUT !!

It's a rule that doesn't bind Republicans on issues that are important to them?

Do you REALLY think the Democrats aren't smart enough to play that game too?

NOPE! I consider the U.S. senate's 60 vote super-majority rule a dead duck.
Click to expand...

Of course the democrats will do it when they are back in power

This is a street fight not an Olympic boxing match and we don't have to let the dems hit us first

Rather repubs should get as much done as possible for as long as they can
 
Karma isn't excluded from the political realm.

During the Obama administration when Majority Leader Harry Reid threatened the nuclear option, Minority Leader McConnell talked him down, explaining the peril of the two-edged sword.

WELL GUESS WHAT MCCONNELL !!

Further, the Republicans have proved themselves not bashful about simply reversing Democrat accomplishment, perhaps wholesale.

That's fine.

BUT !!

It too is a two-edged sword. And this new Republican precedent threatens to destabilize the nation.
 
sear said:
Karma isn't excluded from the political realm.

During the Obama administration when Majority Leader Harry Reid threatened the nuclear option, Minority Leader McConnell talked him down, explaining the peril of the two-edged sword.

WELL GUESS WHAT MCCONNELL !!

Further, the Republicans have proved themselves not bashful about simply reversing Democrat accomplishment, perhaps wholesale.

That's fine.

BUT !!

It too is a two-edged sword. And this new Republican precedent threatens to destabilize the nation.
Click to expand...

There is no doubt the democrats will do the same as soon as they are back in power
 
Mac77 said:
There is no doubt the democrats will do the same as soon as they are back in power
Click to expand...

Maybe, but there are still a bunch of Dems that seem to care less about winning and more about the institution. That's why they tend to get their butts whooped so much.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/04/10/sen-ed-markey-democrats-restore-filibuster-scotus-nominees/100299012/

From the article, "When the Democrats return to the majority and capture the presidency — which we will, that day is going to arrive — we will restore the 60-vote margin," the Massachusetts Democrat said Monday on MSNBC

They just can't help themselves.
 
Mac77 said:
Of course the democrats will do it when they are back in power

This is a street fight not an Olympic boxing match and we don't have to let the dems hit us first

Rather repubs should get as much done as possible for as long as they can
Click to expand...

The GOP doesn't want to get rid of the filibuster for the simple reason that they need it to save them from themselves. Do you think the Senate GOP wants to have to go on record shooting down the garbage the House sends them?

15 months ago the House and Senate sent Obama an ACA repeal. It should be obvious at this point (now that they have total control of government and haven't even contemplated passing that same bill again) that they only passed it because they knew the presidential veto pivot would prevent that terrible bill from actually becoming law. It let them put on a nice show for their rabid base but saved them from the consequences of actually passing that kind of terrible legislation.

They can't rely on the veto for that kind of theater anymore, but they can rely on the filibuster for it. Thus the lack of appetite for getting rid of it. As long as their base remains out of touch with reality, they need to put on a show and yet not actually follow through. The filibuster allows for this.
 
MrPeanut said:
Maybe, but there are still a bunch of Dems that seem to care less about winning and more about the institution. That's why they tend to get their butts whooped so much.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/04/10/sen-ed-markey-democrats-restore-filibuster-scotus-nominees/100299012/

From the article, "When the Democrats return to the majority and capture the presidency — which we will, that day is going to arrive — we will restore the 60-vote margin," the Massachusetts Democrat said Monday on MSNBC

They just can't help themselves.
Click to expand...

I dont believe that for a moment
 
At the 2:pM hour radio news reports indicate the fix is in.
No funding for Trump's wall.

BUT !!

Increased funding for the United States military.
 
sear said:
Ah yes. The so called "nuclear option".

Haven't they already done that? W/ Gorsuch?

Don't you find this ruse a tad conspicuous?

It's a rule.

BUT !!

It's a rule that doesn't bind Republicans on issues that are important to them?

Do you REALLY think the Democrats aren't smart enough to play that game too?

NOPE! I consider the U.S. senate's 60 vote super-majority rule a dead duck.
Click to expand...

It used to be an iron-clad rule but democrat harry reid broke the rule when he was majority leader and obama was in the white house.

Now the repubs are in control and all bets are off
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom