Nancy Pelosi is winning in her battle with Trump. Here's why

[MAGAnificent]

Actually, Trump pretty much makes himself look childish with his own tweets. Pelosi is just making him look like a fool who doesn't know how to negotiate with other adults.

Nancy is making herself look childish by fighting something her party supported in 2006. What's your point? And Nancy has never needed social media to make herself look like a bimbo. Remember: "We have to pass it to see what's in it"?

 

[Rogue Valley]

Nice attempt at spin, but wrong.

S/he is quite right.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Nancy is making herself look childish by fighting something her party supported in 2006. What's your point? And Nancy has never needed social media to make herself look like a bimbo. Remember: "We have to pass it to see what's in it"?

She has the upper hand because Trump has had two years (well, forever) proving that he's a child on Twitter. Trump then invented the "crisis" after having a Republican Congress for those two years.

Trump just looks like the spoiled punk he's always been. Now that he's negotiating with adults (who won't be intimidated by Trump's daddy's money) he just looks impotent.

Much the same way that Hannity, Limbaugh and Coulter would look if they were actually politicians instead of punks who make snide remarks from the cheap seats.

 

[ataraxia]

Nancy Pelosi is winning in her battle with Trump. Here's why



If Trump wants to die on the government shutdown hill, Pelosi will certainly let him. It's just now dawning on Trump that he no longer controls Congress.

Yes, he came from a career where he was the boss and there were no checks and balances on his power. He was the emperor and did as he pleased. He came in to a situation where his party had both houses of congress. There were still hardly any checks or balances on his power, except for an occasional court decision.

This whole business of "check on power" has been a very foreign concept to Trump...until now.

 

[ataraxia]

Much the same way that Hannity, Limbaugh and Coulter would look if they were actually politicians instead of punks who make snide remarks from the cheap seats.

Yeah, but Pelosi might do better just to negotiate with those guys directly, rather than through this middle man Trump. He does as they say. They are the ones really pulling the strings on the executive branch of government today.

 

[MAGAnificent]

We'll see.




IF what you say is true, then McConnell is simply providing cover for those republican senators who must face the voters in 2020. Individually, they cannot afford to be on record as voting against bills to open the government. As of now they can go back to their constituents and claim they did everything they personally could to re-open the government. The only question is, will their constituents buy it?

Again, that is a BIG IF. I think that as election time draws nearer, the GOP senators are going to feel the heat more and more. McConnell could personally be responsible for the GOP losing the senate.




They sent him a bill with $1.6 billion for border security. He didn't sign it because there was no wall. Caught McConnell off guard on that one. That was the number Mulvaney mentioned when Trump went off on him. Those two won't make that mistake again.



Now who's having fantasies? You obviously didn't read "Art of the Deal." Pelosi and I have. How do you think Trump was able to build so many buildings and projects and then stiff his contractors? Good faith? The man doesn't know the meaning of that phrase.



Here we are having a fairly adult conversation, and when you run out of bullets, you throw this crap out. You feel good about it? You like to hurl insults as if that somehow bolsters your position? Well, it doesn't. And if it happens again in a post directed at me, it will be the last time I will respond to you. Now grow up.

Right back at you after you responded with a direct insult. My claiming that you cannot get past the partisan politics is mild in comparison. Whether you respond to me in the future is up to you. Life goes on either way. I'll just address your point about Schumer offering 1.6 billion for border security and Trump turning it down because it lacked funding for the wall. Ofcourse he turned it down. Accepting it would have been insanely stupid. Go back and read the history of the comprehensive immigration bill that former President Reagan signed into law. Promises and funding for border security were included in that bill as well. However actual border security never came. Rank and file Americans no longer trust Washington DC on just promises of border security, no matter how much funding they throw at it, unless it is funding that can offer tangible results. That's why the attempt to pass a comprehensive immigration bill during the Bush administration failed. Americans want border security first. Border security includes a wall. The democrats, including Schumer, Obama, and Hillary Clinton supported a wall in 2006. Why not now?

 

[MAGAnificent]

I know all of that. The question is whether all of the repubs in the senate will go through the year with the government closed over Trump's, well, actually it's Coulter/Hannity/Limbaugh's little piece of wall.

This was the donald's take on the border emergency as of 12/20/18:


What changed? LOL.

If you want to discuss this issue with me, you will have to lose your obsession with Coulter, Hannity and Limbaugh. They have nothing to do with it.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Yeah, but Pelosi might do better just to negotiate with those guys directly, rather than through this middle man Trump. He does as they say. They are the ones really pulling the strings on the executive branch of government today.

And we all get a small glimpse of what the US government would be like if those three had the guts to run for office and actually had huge power.

 

[Rogue Valley]

If you want to discuss this issue with me, you will have to lose your obsession with Coulter, Hannity and Limbaugh. They have nothing to do with it.

Just as soon as you lose your obsessions with Obama and Clinton. They have nothing to do with it.

 

[calamity]

If you want to discuss this issue with me, you will have to lose your obsession with Coulter, Hannity and Limbaugh. They have nothing to do with it.

They do because your hero in the White House listens to them. Duh.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

If you want to discuss this issue with me, you will have to lose your obsession with Coulter, Hannity and Limbaugh. They have nothing to do with it.

Okay.

Unless you can convince me they have nothing to do with it, we're done.

 

[MAGAnificent]

Did the establish Republicans toss the what you call the republican platform aside?

More then that. They barely acknowledged it's existence. To be honest, the establishment republicans in modern times have never really cared about the platform other then using it as a campaign tool to trot out during elections. After the elections, they are more concerned with obedience to big donors who help keep them in power. That goes for both parties.

During Obama they didn't have the numbers to accomplish much. That is outside of stopping legislation Obama wanted for his last six years. Politics is a numbers game quite a lot of the time. There were over 300 bills the GOP house passed that Reid tabled between 2011-14. Whether establishment Republicans or what I assume you call populist Republicans, nothing either could do about that. Even after the GOP gained the senate in the election of 2014, it still required 60 votes for cloture. 2/3rds to over ride an Obama veto in both chambers. The numbers weren't there. There was in reality no reason to get mad or angry at the republicans in congress.

(condensed post due to 5000 character limit)
When the GOP controlled congress they set up a vote for show to repeal Obamacare, knowing Obama would veto it. Afterwards they thought "the coast is clear". Then when Trump was elected president, and they had the chance to repeal it with a simple majority, some of the republicans who voted for it previously voted against it. Trump is not the typical polished politician. if you want to hate him because he insulted a gold star family in the middle of the democrats shamelessly exploiting them or the feud he started with McCain, that's your choice. I criticized him as well when he questioned McCain's military service. As a soldier, McCain was clearly a hero. However as a senator he was a "turd". As for my reasons for supporting Trump, once again, it's more about the populist movement that he tapped into then Trump himself. I went to his first rally and was impressed.. Then as the primaries went on, based on how he treated other GOP candidates, especially Ted Cruz, I wanted nothing to do with him. I was going to sit out the 2016 election altogether. However at some point during the Trump/Hillary debates, I became convinced that one, he intended to follow through on the campaign promises he made (which btw fit right in with the GOP platform) and two that he would fight the nasty political establishment and biased main stream news media. And he is largely following through on all of that. For those reasons, I intend to vote for him again in 2020.

 

[MAGAnificent]

It's not a great idea to attack Nancy Pelosi for her looks or expressions, it makes you appear to be as misogynistic as Trump is. Voting Pelosii Speaker of the House is one of the best things the Democrats in Congress could have possibly done. There's nobody in Washington, either male or female that has the ability to handle someone like Trump. As she said, she raised five kids and so on. The best thing about Nancy Pelosi is that she can throw some good shade without appearing bitchy. "do you think President Trump cancelled your flight out of vindictiveness for disinviting him to the House?" Pelosi: "I don't think the president could be that petty, do you?" And there you go Trump, Nancy Pelosi just handed you lesson #1 in the art of politics.

I know you libruls desperately want to feel that Nancy is "handling Trump", however it's a fantasy. Nancy is one of the biggest reasons that the democrats lost control of the House of Reps in 2010 to begin with. The woman is a complete ditz. The only reason she ended up with the speaker's gavel again was mollifying enough house members who were against her with committee asignments and earmarks. In all likelyhood, she will be handing the gavel back to a republican in the aftermath of 2020.

 

[HumblePi]

I know you libruls desperately want to feel that Nancy is "handling Trump", however it's a fantasy. Nancy is one of the biggest reasons that the democrats lost control of the House of Reps in 2010 to begin with. The woman is a complete ditz. The only reason she ended up with the speaker's gavel again was mollifying enough house members who were against her with committee asignments and earmarks. In all likelyhood, she will be handing the gavel back to a republican in the aftermath of 2020.

If she was then why was she elected as Speaker of the House and next in the line of succession after Pence for the office of the president of the United States?

Trump is going to be schooled big time by a woman!

 

[Kobie]

I know you libruls desperately want to feel that Nancy is "handling Trump", however it's a fantasy. Nancy is one of the biggest reasons that the democrats lost control of the House of Reps in 2010 to begin with. The woman is a complete ditz. The only reason she ended up with the speaker's gavel again was mollifying enough house members who were against her with committee asignments and earmarks. In all likelyhood, she will be handing the gavel back to a republican in the aftermath of 2020.

Baghdad Bob, is that you?

 

[Perotista]

(condensed post due to 5000 character limit)
When the GOP controlled congress they set up a vote for show to repeal Obamacare, knowing Obama would veto it. Afterwards they thought "the coast is clear". Then when Trump was elected president, and they had the chance to repeal it with a simple majority, some of the republicans who voted for it previously voted against it. Trump is not the typical polished politician. if you want to hate him because he insulted a gold star family in the middle of the democrats shamelessly exploiting them or the feud he started with McCain, that's your choice. I criticized him as well when he questioned McCain's military service. As a soldier, McCain was clearly a hero. However as a senator he was a "turd". As for my reasons for supporting Trump, once again, it's more about the populist movement that he tapped into then Trump himself. I went to his first rally and was impressed.. Then as the primaries went on, based on how he treated other GOP candidates, especially Ted Cruz, I wanted nothing to do with him. I was going to sit out the 2016 election altogether. However at some point during the Trump/Hillary debates, I became convinced that one, he intended to follow through on the campaign promises he made (which btw fit right in with the GOP platform) and two that he would fight the nasty political establishment and biased main stream news media. And he is largely following through on all of that. For those reasons, I intend to vote for him again in 2020.

Very true that both major parties kowtow to their donors. You're also correct that there are tons of show votes. The GOP house knew Reid would table every Obamacare bill they passed. They all were a waste of time. But that is exactly what the members of the GOP wanted the House to do. They did it. Then you had Republicans get angry at the GOP house because Obamacare wasn't repealed. They should have got mad at Reid. The GOP house tried to give them what they wanted, it failed. Not because of the GOP house though. You're also correct had they been able to get the repeal through the senate also, Obama would have vetoed it. It's a numbers game that the angry Republican base don't understand.

I would have no problem if Trump trashed McCain as a senator. I have no problem with those trashing him on this site for the things McCain did or didn't do as a Senator. I did and do have a problem with Trump stating basically McCain wasn't a good soldier because he got caught. Trump has a personality problem with the populace. Especially independents. Democrats hate him, that is to be expected. Trump won the white house on the independent vote.

But Trump's persona, his obnoxious personality and very unpresidential behavior grates on independents. Independents if you delve deep into most polls, you'll find out they are for some of Trump's policies, against others, pretty well split on the policy issues. Yet independent approval of Trump's job has dropped from 48% at the end of January 2017 down to 36% today among independents. His favorable rating over the same time period has dropped from 44% down to 36%, his unfavorable rating among independents rose from 41% up to 54% today.

That shouldn't be if independents are fairly split evenly on policy and issues. It never has in the past. Trump's job approval along with his favorable/unfavorable rating among independents should be around 45-45 or almost even. not 36/54. You'll always have 10-15% answer unsure or undecided.

I think if Trump had the personality of a Ronald Reagan instead of the one he has which a lot of independents attribute to a WWE wrestler instead of president. His job approval today would be at 50% or higher, not 40%. Trump because of his personality is an easy man to dislike. That is if you're not an avid Trump supporter. They take their dislike of him and come to the conclusion Trump is a bad president. even when they agree with a lot of what he is doing. I highly doubt Trump will approach the 46% of the independent vote he received in 2016 in 2020. I also think Trump's only hope of reelection is if the democrats run Hillary Clinton again or someone like her.

We'll find out. A lot of Trump supporters laughed at me when in my own forecasts on this site and in posts stated flat out the Democrats would retake the house several months ahead of time because independents would be voting for the Democratic congressional candidates due to their dislike of Trump. I don't have the faintest idea how Trump can win back the independents that once supported him either. Since it isn't policy or issues they don't like. It is the man himself and the man isn't about to change.

 

[Bodi]

I didn't get angry....trust me, you don't have the skills needed to fluster me that bad.

Sure I do... it is just that at this point I consider you a friend...

I DID, however, call you on your bull**** claim, which you STILL haven't actually proven.

Again... I made a statement that you challenged... you offered no evidence and chose to talk about Donnie and Marie for pages... it is not up to me to disprove your claim... it is up to you to prove your claim...

What created wasn't a red herring. It was dead on point.

Sure was... Red Herring. ALERT!

What you claimed wasn't correct. You seem okay with that, and thats fine....you do you. The rest of us don't have to live with alternative facts though.

Why don't you try and communicate what you think my argument so that I can show you how wrong you are...

The fact that you have to conflate those two things to mean the same thing in order for your bogus stance to have any legs is laughable. I mean really...you put both phrases in the same sentence and tried to claim they mean the same thing....and they clearly don't. A wall is one thing.....security is another. They are not synonymous.

It is a saying... a saying meant to convey security directed at stopping illegal immigration...

Then why did you try to make that stupid assed point earlier? Are you having a stroke? Do you smell toast? You're making me worry about you.

I was distinguishing... not trying to make a point beyond that...

 

[Bodi]

"I know you are, but what am I?" great debate tool. You're doing a stellar job. Carry on.

You said that I am a fool but then when I act like one it bothers you?

How does it feel to be bested by a fool?

 

[reflechissez]

You said that I am a fool but then when I act like one it bothers you?

How does it feel to be bested by a fool?

I'm not bothered. Are you?

 

[jnug]

The crux of the entire border barrier argument or anything that has to do with the border and unauthorized immigrants of all types has been a major issue since the Reagan amnesty and the Reagan amnesty was a consequence of not dealing honestly with the actual core of this problem. if we continue to avoid it, it will never be resolved.

The core of the issue is the grind between employers and their desire to drive down wages and everybody else. Oddly enough we (the royal we) think everyday Americans some fearing the browning of America, others fully cognizant of the racism that they deal with every day in this country have nothing in common regarding these issues. Unless you are an employer employing unauthorized immigrants or a forger forging documents for same or a smuggler or a slaver or an immigration officer on the take (oh my....parish the thought) you are all on the same side of this issue whether you like it or not. We as Americans have provided copious amounts of grease to the gears as a means of preventing this grind from simply turning the whole machine into a smoking wreak. We have provided decades and decades of grease for that matter. Trump and his Wall is a sideshow obviously. We know which of the groups I described above Donald is in.

Couple that with our total unwillingness to deal with having essentially ruined the three countries the account for virtually all of our ex-border unauthorized immigrant issues and there you have it.

 

[Bodi]

I'm not bothered. Are you?

Fools besting you do not bother you... good to know... and a bit sad, actually.

 

[MAGAnificent]

Baghdad Bob, is that you?

No actually it's you. If I recall, you were one of the libruls expressing certainty that the hildabeast was going to be elected president in 2016.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[MAGAnificent]

Okay.

Unless you can convince me they have nothing to do with it, we're done.

Bye :bon_voyag

 

[MAGAnificent]

Very true that both major parties kowtow to their donors. You're also correct that there are tons of show votes. The GOP house knew Reid would table every Obamacare bill they passed. They all were a waste of time. But that is exactly what the members of the GOP wanted the House to do. They did it. Then you had Republicans get angry at the GOP house because Obamacare wasn't repealed. They should have got mad at Reid. The GOP house tried to give them what they wanted, it failed. Not because of the GOP house though. You're also correct had they been able to get the repeal through the senate also, Obama would have vetoed it. It's a numbers game that the angry Republican base don't understand.

I am not a republican, however I am of the conservative base. The GOP not getting obamacare repeals while Obama was still in office is not what angered the base. The party stood strong and failed to give the democrats one vote for cover on passing the bill to begin with. What was unforgivable was their weak kneed attempts to repeal it after Obama left office and while the GOP controlled both houses of congress.

I would have no problem if Trump trashed McCain as a senator. I have no problem with those trashing him on this site for the things McCain did or didn't do as a Senator. I did and do have a problem with Trump stating basically McCain wasn't a good soldier because he got caught. Trump has a personality problem with the populace. Especially independents. Democrats hate him, that is to be expected. Trump won the white house on the independent vote.

I am a veteran, myself. While I was disgusted with the comments he made against McCain's military service, considering the establishment dregs we have been sending to DC for the last few decades, it's not on it's own, a deal killer. For me, it's not merely about personalities. Most US presidents in my lifetime have had some sort of personality issues. For instance, I found Bill Clinton's behavior towards women much more disturbing then Trump's comments against McCain's military service. Obama was a severe narcissist with no respect for the separation of powers.

But Trump's persona, his obnoxious personality and very unpresidential behavior grates on independents. Independents if you delve deep into most polls, you'll find out they are for some of Trump's policies, against others, pretty well split on the policy issues. Yet independent approval of Trump's job has dropped from 48% at the end of January 2017 down to 36% today among independents. His favorable rating over the same time period has dropped from 44% down to 36%, his unfavorable rating among independents rose from 41% up to 54% today.

I would bet that the majority of those polls also told you that Trump did not stand a snowball chance in hell of getting elected president in 2016. I believe in the reliability of statistical sampling, only when I trust that it is being done honestly. That is not the case with weighted polls. Even the pollsters admitted that they blew it in the 2016 election with outdated polling methods which included weighting based on previous elections, that failed to catch on to the surge of Trump supporters.

That shouldn't be if independents are fairly split evenly on policy and issues. It never has in the past. Trump's job approval along with his favorable/unfavorable rating among independents should be around 45-45 or almost even. not 36/54. You'll always have 10-15% answer unsure or undecided.

Only the worst presidents are overly obsessed with approval ratings. Clinton for instance let Osama Bin laden slip through his fingers at least twice, because he was too concerned with what a failed op or collateral damage would do to his precious approval ratings.

I think if Trump had the personality of a Ronald Reagan instead of the one he has which a lot of independents attribute to a WWE wrestler instead of president. His job approval today would be at 50% or higher, not 40%. Trump because of his personality is an easy man to dislike. That is if you're not an avid Trump supporter. They take their dislike of him and come to the conclusion Trump is a bad president. even when they agree with a lot of what he is doing. I highly doubt Trump will approach the 46% of the independent vote he received in 2016 in 2020. I also think Trump's only hope of reelection is if the democrats run Hillary Clinton again or someone like her.

Trump had ****ty approval ratings through most of his run for president. That's why RealClearPolitics gave him a 16% chance of getting elected president. Even if you have faith in opinion polls, they are mostly meaningless until the last few weeks before an election.

Continued.......

 

[MAGAnificent]

We'll find out. A lot of Trump supporters laughed at me when in my own forecasts on this site and in posts stated flat out the Democrats would retake the house several months ahead of time because independents would be voting for the Democratic congressional candidates due to their dislike of Trump. I don't have the faintest idea how Trump can win back the independents that once supported him either. Since it isn't policy or issues they don't like. It is the man himself and the man isn't about to change.

I don't really care who may have laughed at your forecast. It's pretty traditional for the first midterms of a new president to end up in a loss of seats for his party. Look at what happened to the democrats in Clinton and Obama's first mid term elections. They both got creamed. Compared to them, Trump did not do all that bad in the 2018 midterm. Obama and Clinton lost control of both houses of congress. The GOP lost the House in 2018, but increased their numbers in the Senate. And I don't necessarily agree with your forecast of Trump losing independents. I also do not agree with your claim that he was elected by independents of which I am one. he drew the conservative base, whether they were republicans, libertarians, or independants. He also drew a sizable number of democrats in the rust belt states. If not for democrats in those three or four blue firewall states voting for him, he would not have been elected. Perhaps the next democrat nominee will avoid going after the coal and steel industry. as for the 2020 election, it's not going to depend on controversial opinion polls and approval ratings. It will depend on how well he is perceived to have done. If the economy is still rolling along with 3% growth, unemployment numbers still remain low,chances are, he will be re-elected despite the Trump haters. And if he gets the border wall, there will be no stopping him. As for the GOP's congress in 2020, keep in mind that Trump was not on the ballet in 2018. He will be on the ballot in 2020. And those who vote for him will in all likelyhood vote a straight GOP ticket.