• 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!

So Now That It Is Happening, Who Is To Blame For Shutdown?

Who is to blame for the shutdown?


  • Total voters
    113
Thanks much for your honesty & integrity here, eohrnberger. I'd give you two 'likes' if I could.

And not to be ungrateful, but I must point-out two things:

1] DAPA was not struck down on constitutional terms (nor was it affirmed). Rather, a stay from a lower court, not the case itself, was adjudicated (it was left in place). Obama never moved against the stay, so the lower court case summarily never proceeded or concluded in a verdict. If that lower court case ever preceded & concluded, then it could go to the SCOTUS for the constitutionality test it never had.

2] Just because Obama believes his DACA directive may have been unconstitutional, does not mean it is unconstitutional. In fact, the courts have never had a problem with DACA.


So yeah, neither DACA nor DAPA ever had a constitutionality test. Which in legal terms means they're legit, until proven not in a court of law. For better or worse.

Which is the federal government body in charge of writing and passing laws? Including immigration laws?
Didn't think it was the executive branch. Didn't think it could be legitimately done with a pen and a phone.
 
Which is the federal government body in charge of writing and passing laws? Including immigration laws?
Didn't think it was the executive branch. Didn't think it could be legitimately done with a pen and a phone.
But it's not a law. It's an administrative order. So unless the order is found unconstitutional, it stands unless Congress decides to make a law specifically to the contrary.

My suspicion is if DACA was unconstitutional, some GOPer somewhere with standing would have brought it to court. But that's just a hunch. I'm surely not infallible here.
 
Trump unilaterally tore up DACA, earlier in the year.

Trump last week, indicated he'd take a specific bipartisan deal. Lindsey Graham then fashioned said deal, and brought it to Trump on a platter. Trump summarily tore the deal up.

Trump instigated this mess. Twice.

Lindsay Graham brought a deal that would have given amnesty to the DACA people, done nothing to end chain migration, and done nothing about the insane VISA lottery system. There was no way in hell he was negotiating in good faith. If Trump had taken that deal we, the people who voted for him, would have been up in arms and it would have destroyed the Republican Party.

So the GOP and President Trump have agreed to negotiate in good faith WITH THE DEMOCRATS to work out a compromise that will allow the DACA people to stay and they have until March to get that done. Meanwhile the continuing resolution that most of the Democrats and a handful of Republicans, including Graham, refused to vote for gave the Democrats everything else they had asked for. But they refused to support it because it did not give amnesty to the DACA people, no strings attached.

They put people here illegally ahead of the needs of the American people and shut down the government. And frankly, I think that is despicable.
 
Lindsay Graham brought a deal that would have given amnesty to the DACA people, done nothing to end chain migration, and done nothing about the insane VISA lottery system. There was no way in hell he was negotiating in good faith. If Trump had taken that deal we, the people who voted for him, would have been up in arms and it would have destroyed the Republican Party.

The details I saw of that deal ended the lottery system completely and while not quite ending chain migration, limited it only to parents of DACA people legalized under the bill. Certainly not exactly what Trump campaigned on, but I think you're somewhat misrepresenting it.
 
The details I saw of that deal ended the lottery system completely and while not quite ending chain migration, limited it only to parents of DACA people legalized under the bill. Certainly not exactly what Trump campaigned on, but I think you're somewhat misrepresenting it.

It is possible that I am and if I did, I apologize. And after thinking about it, I was in error when I said it didn't do anything about the lottery VISA program because, from what I have read, it did but only in return for amnesty and a path to citizenship for people from Haiti, El Salvador, et al here under temporary protected status. It eliminated some people but only maybe 3 to 10% of those currently coming in under chain migration? And it included a pathway to citizenship for the DACA people and maybe millions of others. None of that the President had agreed to. And it did not address the border wall or additional border security.

In other words it was President Reagan's amnesty program on steroids and we all know how that turned out--3 million illegals granted amnesty then resulted in 12 to 20 million or more illegals wanting amnesty now.
 
Last edited:
The details I saw of that deal ended the lottery system completely and while not quite ending chain migration, limited it only to parents of DACA people legalized under the bill. Certainly not exactly what Trump campaigned on, but I think you're somewhat misrepresenting it.

Why is it a good idea to let the parents of DACA folks, those that illegally brought them here or approved of it, have special immigration status? The ending of the lottery was simply a swap for taking the T out of TPS which was worse (allowed even more to remain not based on merit). Also not mentioned was the "down payment" on the Great Wall of Trump of about $1.6B - less than 10% of its guesstimated total cost. AFAIK it made no mention of ever using (transitioning to?) merit based criteria or funding increased interior enforcement.

The problem with discussing these "details" is that they seem to vary based on whose "informed" statements you accept. The bottom line is that until an "immigration reform" bill is drafted there is nothing much to debate and it appears that no bill will be drafted until somebody (parties not yet named) agrees that a deal has been worked out. It seems that the when and who must be worked out before the what which seems much like the tail wagging the dog to me.
 
But it's not a law. It's an administrative order. So unless the order is found unconstitutional, it stands unless Congress decides to make a law specifically to the contrary.

My suspicion is if DACA was unconstitutional, some GOPer somewhere with standing would have brought it to court. But that's just a hunch. I'm surely not infallible here.

It is unconstitutional because it was a President refusing to enforce a law passed by Congress and signed into law by the President of the United States. DACA is not a law. It is abrogation of responsibility to enforce existing law. But because the GOP wants a solution for the DACA people too, they have made no move to challenge the executive order but now have an opportunity to legally take care of the DACA group in a sensible and reasonable manner. But unfortunately, the Democrats are saying if we don't grant amnesty to pretty much everybody, there will be no deal.
 
Why is it a good idea to let the parents of DACA folks, those that illegally brought them here or approved of it, have special immigration status? The ending of the lottery was simply a swap for taking the T out of TPS which was worse (allowed even more to remain not based on merit). Also not mentioned was the "down payment" on the Great Wall of Trump of about $1.6B - less than 10% of its guesstimated total cost. AFAIK it made no mention of ever using (transitioning to?) merit based criteria or funding increased interior enforcement.

The problem with discussing these "details" is that they seem to vary based on whose "informed" statements you accept. The bottom line is that until an "immigration reform" bill is drafted there is nothing much to debate and it appears that no bill will be drafted until somebody (parties not yet named) agrees that a deal has been worked out. It seems that the when and who must be worked out before the what which seems much like the tail wagging the dog to me.

It’s not good. I don’t support it. I just saw the post and it didn’t reflect what I had read about the proposal.
 
Lindsey Graham: “Every time we have a proposal, it is only yanked back by staff members. As long as Stephen Miller is in charge of negotiating on immigration, we are going nowhere.”

Fox News is obviously going to push the narrative that this is all on Democrats' heads, but you can't keep the fact that trump is impossible to negotiate with out of the public sphere forever. He's not being real subtle about it.

Graham isn't a Dem. Could have fooled me. He's globalist, open-borders POS.
 
Hillary Clinton, because she was such a piece of garbage that people who refused to vote for Trump (like me) also couldn't vote for her.

Stephen Miller, because he's now leading Trump around like a puppy dog.
 
Nope. Hawkeye will look for the "elites" option!

I am using FAILED INTELLIGENTSIA! more often these days.

Look, this is a new thing in America we are talking about, we have not the lot of us quite figured out all the words we need yet.
 
Can someone explain the shut down to me? Is it true that republicans almost unanimously voted in favor of a budget, bug the Democrats almost unanimously opposed it? I’m just wondering about some numbers I saw that had a 95% yes republicans and 95% no Democrats. If this is the case...it sounds like it is clear the Democrats failed. And 5% of republicans too.

Also...how can this be on trump if he isn’t voting on the issue?
 
Pick all that apply(I will set it up as multiple choices allowed). Who is at fault, who is to blame for the shutdown.

Please by patient as my old, slow fingers type out the poll options.



Another redress thread where he doesn't offer any sort of intellectual opinion. At least I see you voted to blame the Republicans, and everyone else as if you don't have a position.


Let me ask you, why do you blame the republicans, and if you blamed the republicans last time, why do you blame them this time. did you blame democrats last time as well, or was it your typical not taking a stand redress type post?


How about offering an opinion for once.
 
Last edited:
Can someone explain the shut down to me? Is it true that republicans almost unanimously voted in favor of a budget, bug the Democrats almost unanimously opposed it? I’m just wondering about some numbers I saw that had a 95% yes republicans and 95% no Democrats. If this is the case...it sounds like it is clear the Democrats failed. And 5% of republicans too.

Also...how can this be on trump if he isn’t voting on the issue?



We can easily search and watch these hacks who blamed the republicans last time, do so again now without caring about looking like raging hypocrites.
 
Another redress thread where he doesn't offer any sort of intellectual opinion. At least I see you voted to blame the Republicans.


Let me ask you, why do you blame the republicans, and if you blamed the republicans last time, why do you blame them this time.


How about offering an opinion for once.

Redress also voted to blame the senate and house democrats. :|
 
Another redress thread where he doesn't offer any sort of intellectual opinion. At least I see you voted to blame the Republicans, and everyone else as if you don't have a position.

Let me ask you, why do you blame the republicans, and if you blamed the republicans last time, why do you blame them this time. did you blame democrats last time as well, or was it your typical not taking a stand redress type post?

How about offering an opinion for once.

Did you just not read, or are you being intentionally dishonest in your presentation. Redress's blame includes the House and Senate Democrats along with the Republicans. Redress's blame this time is very similar to what their blame was in 2013; all sides share a hand in the blame for the shutdown
 
Redress also voted to blame the senate and house democrats. :|



I was in the middle of editing, thanks for your concern but no donuts for you.



I see you blamed of course, since you are a hyper partisan, the republicans, Perhaps you can explain your cognitive dissonance since it's obvious you blamed them last time as well.


Do you think trump will be an asshole like Obama and pay capital police to keep dying WWII vets from an unmanned memorial pavilion? I don't expect an honest answer.
 
We can easily search and watch these hacks who blamed the republicans last time, do so again now without caring about looking like raging hypocrites.

So would you say this time it's Trump's fault for purposefully going out of his way to hurt American's to make the left look bad?
 
Did you just not read, or are you being intentionally dishonest in your presentation. Redress's blame includes the House and Senate Democrats along with the Republicans. Redress's blame this time is very similar to what their blame was in 2013; all sides share a hand in the blame for the shutdown



As I sad to Card, I was in the middle of editing. Redress tends not to form opinions and comes in with a comment like mine in random threads. Often far less topical and far more personal. I'd like to hear his opinion on why he blames all of them, and how each of them share the blame. I won't hold my breath however.
 
So would you say this time it's Trump's fault for purposefully going out of his way to hurt American's to make the left look bad?



If he does **** like shut down unmanned parking lots, and unmanned WWII veterans memorials with paid capital police, absolutely. if he is on record saying "I want it to hurt" absolutely.


https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/5/email-tells-feds-make-sequester-painful-promised/


Show me one of these by the trump admin, and I'll be the first to slam him for it.
 
If he does **** like shut down unmanned parking lots, and unmanned WWII veterans memorials with paid capital police, absolutely. if he is on record saying "I want it to hurt" absolutely.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/5/email-tells-feds-make-sequester-painful-promised/

Show me one of these by the trump admin, and I'll be the first to slam him for it.

Right right, "It's DIFFFFFERENT" so my blaming of the same time in both times is fine

Please explain to me how this is any different than what you've been railing at Cardinal about with his attempt at going "It's DIFFFERENT!" because republicans controlled the house and democrats don't this time and thus it's perfectly okay for him to blame one side both times.

How about voting to not pay the military during the shutdown, like was unanimously voted on by both parties in 2013? Would that count as being something to "make it hurt"? Do Republicans get the blame for the shutdown since they did that?

It's as ludicrous as annoying the fact that the Democrats not owning the House doesn't change the fact that their status within congress is solid enough to impede a budget bill passing the senate, which is the same place it ultimately was doomed in 2013, and that the Democrats of 2018 are functioning in the same fashion as the republicans in 2013 in that manner despite peoples desire to go "no no no, it's always the republicans fault because they're big bad meanie head fascists!"
 
Right right, "It's DIFFFFFERENT" so my blaming of the same time in both times is fine

Please explain to me how this is any different than what you've been railing at Cardinal about with his attempt at going "It's DIFFFERENT!" because republicans controlled the house and democrats don't this time and thus it's perfectly okay for him to blame one side both times.

How about voting to not pay the military during the shutdown, like was unanimously voted on by both parties in 2013? Would that count as being something to "make it hurt"? Do Republicans get the blame for the shutdown since they did that?

It's as ludicrous as annoying the fact that the Democrats not owning the House doesn't change the fact that their status within congress is solid enough to impede a budget bill passing the senate, which is the same place it ultimately was doomed in 2013, and that the Democrats of 2018 are functioning in the same fashion as the republicans in 2013 in that manner despite peoples desire to go "no no no, it's always the republicans fault because they're big bad meanie head fascists!"



I blamed both sides, both times. I thing the difference is the evidence I have shown that Obama purposefully wanted to "make it hurt" to get republicans to look bad.


The WWII memorial pavilion, which no employee works at, obama had to pay capital police to stand there to keep dying wwii vets from going onto it. You show me that and I'll call trump as big a scumbag as obama on this.


You built a strawman.
 
Another redress thread where he doesn't offer any sort of intellectual opinion. At least I see you voted to blame the Republicans, and everyone else as if you don't have a position.


Let me ask you, why do you blame the republicans, and if you blamed the republicans last time, why do you blame them this time. did you blame democrats last time as well, or was it your typical not taking a stand redress type post?


How about offering an opinion for once.

Instead of crying and insulting, maybe you should read the thread, where I do offer opinions. And I find it hilarious that you say I blamed republicans, when I blamed them along with democrats. Why the need to be dishonest?
 
Instead of crying and insulting, maybe you should read the thread, where I do offer opinions. And I find it hilarious that you say I blamed republicans, when I blamed them along with democrats. Why the need to be dishonest?



You need to learn how to read. you should practice what you preach. I said republicans "and everyone else". The only one crying and being dishonest is you.
 
You need to learn how to read. you should practice what you preach. I said republicans "and everyone else". The only one crying and being dishonest is you.

Yeah, sure. Project much?
 
Back
Top Bottom