Government shutdown again?

[roguenuke]

And a bill that goes through congress needs the presidents signature. And he wont sign until the wall is funded. So we have the potential for a shut down.

If the only thing causing that is the lack of funding for a wall, then it is on him, particularly if it went through Congress. He is the one harping on the wall when most Americans do not want the wall.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/372575-poll-majority-opposes-border-wall-with-mexico

Since the majority oppose a border wall, I'm willing to bet that the majority would not be with Trump if he vetoed a budget bill for not funding a wall.

 

[Cordelier]

What happened to e-verify and prosecuting companies?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

What happened to addressing the post I put up?

 

[Cordelier]

He did. He gave congress a plan and 4 things needed in his plan.
They punted and refused to come up with what he wanted.

As long as the plan included those things he would have passed the bill and congress came up with another ****ty
immigration bill.

What bill are you referring to?

 

[trouble13]

What happened to addressing the post I put up?

I was addressing your post. This stuff was proposed in 1986. It was never implimented

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk

 

[Cordelier]

I was addressing your post. This stuff was proposed in 1986. It was never implimented

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk

E-verify wasn't around in 1986 - they only started it as a pilot project in 1997.

As for prosecuting employers... well, to the extent it didn't happen, I'd suggest the blame goes to the Executive Branch. The Legislative Branch may not have given the Reagan and Bush Administrations all of the funding they requested, certainly gave them enough to do a credible job.

 

[ludin]

What bill are you referring to?

The last immigration bill that came out of the senate. it was a joke and did nothing
to really change anything.

 

[Captain America]

So, if this doesn't remove any doubt regarding Trump's will to be our dictator, nothing will.

Throw a tantrum and shut down the government if you don't get what you want.

Isn't that special?

View attachment 67237199

 

[Dittohead not!]

If shutting down the government affects no one, no one will care who is to blame for the government shutting down... It's not that difficult of a concept to understand.

If no one were affected by the government shut down, then no one would care who is to blame, that's true.

 

[Cordelier]

The last immigration bill that came out of the senate. it was a joke and did nothing
to really change anything.

Okay... you're talking about the Immigration Amendments to HR 2579 back in February. Trump's plan failed 39-60... the Schumer-Collins plan didn't get the required 60 votes either, failing 54-45. If we're going to do a deal here, it seems to me that that's a better place to start.

On second thought, scratch that... I think the better place to start is for the Administration to actually figure out where it stands on the issue. What the hell happened with the House Republican compromise last month (HR 6136)? One second, Trump "is behind it 1000%", then he's telling them not to bother because it won't pass the Senate, then he's suddenly back on board again. The hardest part of getting what you want is knowing what you want. Maybe the President should pick a course and then stick to it?

 

[jaeger19]

I think the hard core opposition to the other party began before 2008, although that may be when the light shown brightly on it. But is it the people, America as a whole that changed or is it the two major parties? ]

I would say that it is people as a whole have changed. I believe that we end up with the government that we deserve. Sure, the more radical elements have gotten ahold of the primaries in a much stronger position than perhaps before.. but the parties as a whole have moved as the people have changed. Our politics is a reflection of our society and not the other way around.

People lament the "way young people act today".. and that there " is no civility".. and yet not only tolerate extreme obnoxious behavior from their leaders.. but reward it by electing them.

As far as the poll. I would like to see that poll go farther and see what the pollsters... WERE WILLING TO COMPROMISE ON. I would bet dollars to donuts.. the view of compromise is that the other side should come over to them.. and that in no way are they going to compromise THEIR positions.

 

[roguenuke]

If no one were affected by the government shut down, then no one would care who is to blame, that's true.

I actually am affected by a government shutdown. Depending on when it starts/ends and how long it lasts, reservists are not allowed to come into drill if it goes over a drill weekend or possibly could. That DWE is rescheduled. This might sound like no big deal, except some depend on that extra little bit of 4 days of pay to help them through the month or even just paying for their health/dental insurance. Miss one month, and that could cause problems. Worse, if you have an Annual Training planned for that period, it could get rescheduled as well, which could mean issues at a civilian job having already made arrangements that end up cancelled.

 

[Bum]

Wouldnt be the first time its happened or been threatened.....its a game of chicken; who blinks first?

 

[FreeWits]

Admittedly didn't read all the comments, but I'm struggling to understand the strategy here. Trump's strategy is usually top-notch, even when people can't understand it at first, but the party that gets blamed for the government shutdown usually takes the political hit for it. Trying to make sense of it, maybe Trump knew a government shutdown was going to happen, he's trying to get ahead of it, and is trying to show the public that he's still fighting for wall, and they need to vote Republicans in to get the wall. I'm not sure if that will really work out, but maybe that's the thinking.

Another thing is maybe he's trying to get those in Congress to send him a better bill. Who knows...

 

[Threegoofs]

Wouldnt be the first time its happened or been threatened.....its a game of chicken; who blinks first?

But its one of the first times a government shutdown is being threatened when one party controls both houses of Congress AND the White House!

Its almost inconceivable how stupid this is.

 

[Bum]

But its one of the first times a government shutdown is being threatened when one party controls both houses of Congress AND the White House!

Its almost inconceivable how stupid this is.

I dont disagree...but I stopped paying too much attention to it a while ago.....it screws with my digestion.

 

[Perotista]

I would say that it is people as a whole have changed. I believe that we end up with the government that we deserve. Sure, the more radical elements have gotten ahold of the primaries in a much stronger position than perhaps before.. but the parties as a whole have moved as the people have changed. Our politics is a reflection of our society and not the other way around.

People lament the "way young people act today".. and that there " is no civility".. and yet not only tolerate extreme obnoxious behavior from their leaders.. but reward it by electing them.

As far as the poll. I would like to see that poll go farther and see what the pollsters... WERE WILLING TO COMPROMISE ON. I would bet dollars to donuts.. the view of compromise is that the other side should come over to them.. and that in no way are they going to compromise THEIR positions.

True. It seems the other fellow always has to make the first step. As for the people as a whole, I'm not so sure they are driving the change. I think the rise in independents, folks leaving both major parties show that cooperation is wanted. Since 2006 independents has increased from 30% of the electorate to 41% using Gallup's July 2018 numbers. That's quite a rise that came from folks leaving both parties.

Good point on compromise, that is what is expected today. Compromise is the other side coming over to your side. Instead of both sides moving towards the middle. One also has to understand there are issues in which no compromise can be had. But I also think on most issues, movement from both sides can be accomplished if they wanted to or accomplish something.

 

[jaeger19]

True. It seems the other fellow always has to make the first step. As for the people as a whole, I'm not so sure they are driving the change. I think the rise in independents, folks leaving both major parties show that cooperation is wanted. Since 2006 independents has increased from 30% of the electorate to 41% using Gallup's July 2018 numbers. That's quite a rise that came from folks leaving both parties.

Good point on compromise, that is what is expected today. Compromise is the other side coming over to your side. Instead of both sides moving towards the middle. One also has to understand there are issues in which no compromise can be had. But I also think on most issues, movement from both sides can be accomplished if they wanted to or accomplish something.

I am not sure that the rise in independents is folks leaving because they want cooperation..I think its because folks are being turned off by 1. The insane antics and hate of their party.

2. The you are either with us 100% or you are a ...... that both parties are engaging in.


I think that it was the people that drove the change..both sides have always had their radical elements. So whats new now? I think that both sides started liking the power/ the effect of letting those radical elements out of the bag.. .partly because there was a portion of them that they agreed with..

And now the train has left the station.

 

[Perotista]

I am not sure that the rise in independents is folks leaving because they want cooperation..I think its because folks are being turned off by 1. The insane antics and hate of their party.

2. The you are either with us 100% or you are a ...... that both parties are engaging in.


I think that it was the people that drove the change..both sides have always had their radical elements. So whats new now? I think that both sides started liking the power/ the effect of letting those radical elements out of the bag.. .partly because there was a portion of them that they agreed with..

And now the train has left the station.

Could be. We do certainly partake of the politics of hate today. Both parties have become adept at the divide and conquer strategy of pitting one group of voters against another. Preaching doom, gloom and fear if the other side wins. The idea seems to get the voter to hate the other guy more than they hate you. If the favorable/unfavorable ratings of the two major party candidates are correct, Trump 36/60%, Clinton 38/58% the politics of hate, the negative personal attack ads certainly work.

If CNN's exit polls were correct, half of all those who voted for Trump were anti Clinton voters. Not necessarily for Trump, but against Clinton. The portion of Clinton voters who were anti Trump voters was 40%. Add the 6 percent who voted third party, you have half the nation voting against candidates, not for any particular one. According to CNN most of those third party voters were voting against both major party candidates. Just like I did.

Here in Georgia now that the runoff's are over, we have an extreme right wing Republican vs. an extreme left wing Democrat for governor. Is this going to be the norm for the future? Since both parties seem to be taken over by the extremes, is this all we going to get moving forward?

 

[Dittohead not!]

I actually am affected by a government shutdown. Depending on when it starts/ends and how long it lasts, reservists are not allowed to come into drill if it goes over a drill weekend or possibly could. That DWE is rescheduled. This might sound like no big deal, except some depend on that extra little bit of 4 days of pay to help them through the month or even just paying for their health/dental insurance. Miss one month, and that could cause problems. Worse, if you have an Annual Training planned for that period, it could get rescheduled as well, which could mean issues at a civilian job having already made arrangements that end up cancelled.

Exactly right. Some people are bound to be affected.

 

[jaeger19]

Could be. We do certainly partake of the politics of hate today. Both parties have become adept at the divide and conquer strategy of pitting one group of voters against another. Preaching doom, gloom and fear if the other side wins. The idea seems to get the voter to hate the other guy more than they hate you. If the favorable/unfavorable ratings of the two major party candidates are correct, Trump 36/60%, Clinton 38/58% the politics of hate, the negative personal attack ads certainly work.

If CNN's exit polls were correct, half of all those who voted for Trump were anti Clinton voters. Not necessarily for Trump, but against Clinton. The portion of Clinton voters who were anti Trump voters was 40%. Add the 6 percent who voted third party, you have half the nation voting against candidates, not for any particular one. According to CNN most of those third party voters were voting against both major party candidates. Just like I did.

Here in Georgia now that the runoff's are over, we have an extreme right wing Republican vs. an extreme left wing Democrat for governor. Is this going to be the norm for the future? Since both parties seem to be taken over by the extremes, is this all we going to get moving forward?

Well.. and in my opinion.. you have just asked the key question of what is the new norm?

Cuz.. while the hate has been very powerful.. and effective strategy... at some point.. things DO have to work. I think you are seeing some of that unraveling with Donald trumps trade strategies,.. more and more businesses folks are starting to say.. "hold on, this affects my pocketbook"..

The same with healthcare insurance.. thats affecting peoples pocketbooks.

So.. I think that this next election and the aftermath is going to be VERY VERY interesting. Because I think that on one hand... democrats are going to be able to ride a wave of Anti Trump.. to get control of the Congress.. (of course who knows in this day and age but thats conventional wisdom)..

But.. as things don't get done.. and continue to unravel... if democrats want to keep power.. and not get another wave of republicans in... they are going to HAVE to work with TRump...

Or at least try. Because I don't think the Anti Trump.. actually will hold their positions.. like the Anti OBama did for the republicans. That's because Trump doesn;t do much to really fight in congress against. Sure.. we might have issues with trade.. that they can keep working. but unlike Obama who actually pushed things.. like Obamacare, and the ARRA.. and increasing taxes, and the Wars..

What does congress have to be the party of NO.. when it comes to trump? He doesn't introduce much legislation.. heck.. he can't make up his mind on legislation.. his own party doesn;t know from one minute to the next.. what he supports (I doubt trump does himself).

I think.. there is an opportunity by the democrats.. to actually get everything they want..when trump is in office... but its going to take the democrats realizing to get what they want.. they end up helping trump get elected for another term. (or maybe hope that the Mueller investigation takes him down).

Trump has shown that he will work with democrats.. if it makes him look good (like on the gun control issue.. etc)..

So its going to be interesting.

 

[jaeger19]

Exactly right. Some people are bound to be affected.

Except I think Trump as Potus gets to decide what is essential functions and what is not... which means that he will lessen any government shutdown on his political allies.. and clamp down on those against him.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Except I think Trump as Potus gets to decide what is essential functions and what is not... which means that he will lessen any government shutdown on his political allies.. and clamp down on those against him.

That's a possibility for sure.

I remember the last shutdown, or maybe it was the one before that, the Congress wasted no time in re opening the FAA, as the shutdown had laid off the air traffic controllers and shut down the airports.

 

[Perotista]

Well.. and in my opinion.. you have just asked the key question of what is the new norm?

Cuz.. while the hate has been very powerful.. and effective strategy... at some point.. things DO have to work. I think you are seeing some of that unraveling with Donald trumps trade strategies,.. more and more businesses folks are starting to say.. "hold on, this affects my pocketbook"..

The same with healthcare insurance.. thats affecting peoples pocketbooks.

So.. I think that this next election and the aftermath is going to be VERY VERY interesting. Because I think that on one hand... democrats are going to be able to ride a wave of Anti Trump.. to get control of the Congress.. (of course who knows in this day and age but thats conventional wisdom)..

But.. as things don't get done.. and continue to unravel... if democrats want to keep power.. and not get another wave of republicans in... they are going to HAVE to work with TRump...

Or at least try. Because I don't think the Anti Trump.. actually will hold their positions.. like the Anti OBama did for the republicans. That's because Trump doesn;t do much to really fight in congress against. Sure.. we might have issues with trade.. that they can keep working. but unlike Obama who actually pushed things.. like Obamacare, and the ARRA.. and increasing taxes, and the Wars..

What does congress have to be the party of NO.. when it comes to trump? He doesn't introduce much legislation.. heck.. he can't make up his mind on legislation.. his own party doesn;t know from one minute to the next.. what he supports (I doubt trump does himself).

I think.. there is an opportunity by the democrats.. to actually get everything they want..when trump is in office... but its going to take the democrats realizing to get what they want.. they end up helping trump get elected for another term. (or maybe hope that the Mueller investigation takes him down).

Trump has shown that he will work with democrats.. if it makes him look good (like on the gun control issue.. etc)..

So its going to be interesting.

Yeah, Trump himself doesn't know what he believes in. Trump is intriguing in that he for most of his life held pretty liberal views. That is until he decided to run for the presidency as a Republican. He changed a lot of his stances. Romney did that, from a liberal Republican governor to a conservative to run for the presidency. That got him labeled a flip flopper. Trump did the same, nothing, no flip flopper, nothing.

I agree that the democrats will probably ride the anti-Trump wave to take control of the house. If the election were held today, I'd say they gain 35-45 seats. Will being anti-Trump be enough to retain those seats? I don't know.

You make a good point on legislation. Outside of the tax cuts and the attempted repeal of Obamacare, Trump really hasn't pushed much at all. He has made use of revoking or rescinding regulations and EO's. He hasn't proposed any earth shattering legislation though. He is stuck on his wall. Trump did seem willing to work with the Democrats on immigration reform, but basically was turned down. Immigration is now the top problem. 54% of Americans say immigration is very important, another 29% somewhat important.

Okay, but the pollsters don't ask what side of that issue that is so important people are on. Congress doesn't have to be a party of no. They could play the game of give and take, if they wanted. But extreme ideologues prevent this. It used to work. Reagan and Tip O'Neal were great at that. Reagan wanted some money for SDI, O'Neal more money for social programs, both got some of what they wanted. Neither side was happy, but both programs continued to move forward. We've gotten away from that.

 

[jaeger19]

Yeah, Trump himself doesn't know what he believes in. .

Trump believes in whats best for Trump.

Romney doesn't hold a candle to the flip flop that Trump made and makes. but you are right.. no flip flopping.. none of that. Which is a scary thing when you think of it. Trump is in a position of power because of his personal effect on people.. and not on his positions/actions. Heck.. I think he recognized this himself when at a rally he said "I could shoot a guy right here and you would love it (or something to that effect).. and the crowd cheered.

History of Il Duce and De Fuhrer come to mind.

Trump did seem willing to work with the Democrats on immigration reform, but basically was turned down. Immigration is now the top problem. 54% of Americans say immigration is very important, another 29% somewhat important.

I don't think he was turned down.. he did a flip flop and the Democrats weren;t going to carry anymore water from him. Then he could have gotten something passed with republicans and a few democrats and then he left the republicans out to dry. And now they won't introduce legislation or push it seriously until they get a commitment from him on what he wants.. which is why nothing has gotten done.

Congress doesn't have to be a party of no. They could play the game of give and take, if they wanted

But.. that means then that you end up putting Trump in a better position. Its not just the ideologues that re a problem here. its also the politics. Getting things done.. means that Trump looks good. And that hurts the Dems chances of a Democrat in the next election.

Its a catch 22 for the democrats.. if they win congress.

 

[Perotista]

Trump believes in whats best for Trump.

Romney doesn't hold a candle to the flip flop that Trump made and makes. but you are right.. no flip flopping.. none of that. Which is a scary thing when you think of it. Trump is in a position of power because of his personal effect on people.. and not on his positions/actions. Heck.. I think he recognized this himself when at a rally he said "I could shoot a guy right here and you would love it (or something to that effect).. and the crowd cheered.

History of Il Duce and De Fuhrer come to mind.



I don't think he was turned down.. he did a flip flop and the Democrats weren;t going to carry anymore water from him. Then he could have gotten something passed with republicans and a few democrats and then he left the republicans out to dry. And now they won't introduce legislation or push it seriously until they get a commitment from him on what he wants.. which is why nothing has gotten done.



But.. that means then that you end up putting Trump in a better position. Its not just the ideologues that re a problem here. its also the politics. Getting things done.. means that Trump looks good. And that hurts the Dems chances of a Democrat in the next election.

Its a catch 22 for the democrats.. if they win congress.

Perhaps that is what it all boils down to. Winning elections has replaced governing or moving the country forward. Of course any congress that works with any president, the president will get most of the credit. An example is that LBJ gets the credit for the civil rights act and the voting rights act, Medicare. Yet without Republican cooperation, their help, none of that would have been accomplished. LBJ needed their votes to get these things passed. Different era for sure, but a good example I think.

Even if the Republicans in congress get a commitment from Trump on legislation, that doesn't mean Trump won't change his mind. I suppose the bottom line is one can't trust Trump. Of course Trump might be all for something one day, but totally opposed the next. Depends on his mood or what pops into his mind.

The Democrats set out to destroy Trump the day after the election, they will never cooperate with him even if Trump took their side. This brings to mind Bill Clinton, after he lost congress to the Republicans in 1994, Bill changed strategy, he would cooperate with the GOP congress and came up with triangulation. Bill realized the agenda he had engaged in his first two years was dead. I think Bill, under the circumstances accomplished quite a lot over his last six years.

Obama in my opinion didn't learn from Bill when he lost the House in 2010. Obama continued to try to push the same agenda he had his first two year throughout his presidency. He didn't change or adapt to the new reality. Instead it was his phone, his pen and EO's and enhanced regulations from the various departments. Not legislation.

This brings me to Trump. If the Democrats take the House this midterm, I think they will. Will Trump change and adapt to this new reality or remain firm. Does it matter if he does or doesn't. Being he has pushed very little legislation outside of Obamacare repeal and the tax cuts. Perhaps he will be satisfied to do nothing and accomplish nothing. Just stopping the new Democratic House from accomplishing anything. That seems to be the politics of today.

This brings me to the last question. Is Trump at all interested in governing? Outside of the wall, what does he really want to accomplish? Is he happy just to be a presidential showman with the perks and without an agenda? Okay more than one last question, but they all tie together.