Raising social involvement, self awareness and self improvement topics, because our communities are the sum of our personal beliefs, behaviors, action or inaction. Only "we" can improve our family, work place, school, city, country, etc.
GOP Proposal: Manchin voted yes Cotton voted NO Paul & Risch did not vote
DEM Proposal: Alexander, Collins, Gardner, Isakson, Murkowski, Romney voted yes No DEMs voted no Rosen (D) did not vote Burr (R) and Paul (R) did not vote
I just wonder what Trump thought would happen. Did he think federal workers would all write their congressmen and demand they fund a wall? How does stiffing federal workers make wall funding more likely?
The Senate had passed a bill with $0 for barriers. The House had passed a bill with $5.7 billion for barriers. He agreed to sign a bill with $5.7 billion for barriers.
That normal negotiations would yield a bill with $2.7 billion for barriers.
Then the DEMs came in and foolishly drew a $0 red line for for barriers, and called it immoral...
Is splitting the difference common among political dealmakers? Is that what Trump did in the private sector?
If I go to a car dealership and they offer to sell me a car for 20,000 dollars, and I counteroffer a dollar ninety eight, does that mean they will eventually sell it to me for 10,000 bucks?
Just because Trump runs a coequal branch of government, doesn't mean he is equal to Congress. The constitution allocates the entire power of the purse to Congress, not just half of it.
The Senate had passed a bill with $0 for barriers. The House had passed a bill with $5.7 billion for barriers. He agreed to sign a bill with $5.7 billion for barriers."
No, Trump agreed to sign the Senate bill, then backed off when Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter jerked his chain and he came to heel.
"Then the DEMs came in and foolishly drew a $0 red line for for barriers"
If Trump wanted $5.7B for barriers, he had two years to do it with a GOP Congress and the powers of reconciliation. Nancy Pelosi ain't bound by Paul Ryan's offer.
The reality is of course, that there are all kinds of deals to be made, and that the money really isn't the issue. It would be pretty easy to fashion a deal for border security, one that might possibly involve spending considerably more than 5.7 billion dollars. But in making that kind of deal, Trump would have to give up the idea that he has achieved a political victory over the Democrats. And the reason that deal doesn't happen is that the political victory is the only thing he really wants.
I do agree that this simply a power struggle between DEM leadership and Trump.
I don't know why it would make sense to spend 5.7 billion dollars resolve a power struggle. And the very least we should keep the bill for that in seven figures at most.
Now she will need to cross this boundary of her own making. Just as Trump did.
Otherwise she will be the creator of the problem."
It is not normal to shut down the govt to try to get your way. Obama did not do this to get a path for citizenship for the dreamers. If congress does not support or go along with the president's priorities so sad to bad. He should have funded the wall when he had a GOP congress.
Interesting. Trump gives Pelosi what she craves in exchange for "real border security" according to the "experts." Now Pelosi has to deliver on HER promise, no more excuses. Care to bet $5.7 billion she does what is good for the country, rather than more bombast and intransigence?
Seems to me that the SOTU will be "check" on Pelosi. He can tell the world HE cares about border security, HE cares about goverment workers, and HE cares about disaster relief and HE cares about the DACA kids, and she does not. Then he can say he is waiting for her to prove that she cares, rather than raw politics. And he can blame the delayed SoTU on her, too. 5 moves ahead.
THAT is how you define "far right nutjobs"? That is the LAW as it stands! What Trump is doing is enforcing the law that Obama arbitrarily suspended! You need to adjust the center on your "nutjob meter" WAY farther to the right, until at half or more of elected Democrats fall off the other end.
Jerry, What the law is today is not as important as where the perspectives are today to determining who are the far right nut jobs.
Sixty-five percent of Americans said they favor giving legal status to DREAMers, as a deadline set by President Trump quickly approaches for when temporary status will run out for hundreds of thousands of DACA recipients. That includes 81 percent of Democrats, 51 percent of Republicans and 66 percent of independents. (DACA, or Deferred Actions for Childhood Arrivals, is the executive order signed by former President Obama and rescinded by President Trump.)
The big problem right now is the Far Right Half of the GOP.
Disagree. The problem right now is that Trump has offered such status to the current DREAMERS and more, but Democrats repeatedly refuse to accept yes for an answer.
Ah, the famous liberal "situational ethics." "far right" is exactly where it has always been. The center has been allowed to creep far to the left of the rational.
From Sean:
ReplyDeleteWorth noting that Chuck Schumer's "end the shutdown" bill got more votes in the Senate today than Donald Trump's did.
Interesting details
ReplyDeleteGOP Proposal:
Manchin voted yes
Cotton voted NO
Paul & Risch did not vote
DEM Proposal:
Alexander, Collins, Gardner, Isakson, Murkowski, Romney voted yes
No DEMs voted no
Rosen (D) did not vote
Burr (R) and Paul (R) did not vote
I knew there was a reason I like Manchin, Alexander, Collins, Gardner, Isakson, Murkowski, Romney. :-)
ReplyDeleteThey are daring enough to cross party lines...
I just wonder what Trump thought would happen. Did he think federal workers would all write their congressmen and demand they fund a wall? How does stiffing federal workers make wall funding more likely?
ReplyDelete--Hiram
I assume he thought... That in December...
ReplyDeleteThe Senate had passed a bill with $0 for barriers.
The House had passed a bill with $5.7 billion for barriers.
He agreed to sign a bill with $5.7 billion for barriers.
That normal negotiations would yield a bill with $2.7 billion for barriers.
Then the DEMs came in and foolishly drew a $0 red line for for barriers, and called it immoral...
So now we are stuck...
Is splitting the difference common among political dealmakers? Is that what Trump did in the private sector?
ReplyDeleteIf I go to a car dealership and they offer to sell me a car for 20,000 dollars, and I counteroffer a dollar ninety eight, does that mean they will eventually sell it to me for 10,000 bucks?
Just because Trump runs a coequal branch of government, doesn't mean he is equal to Congress. The constitution allocates the entire power of the purse to Congress, not just half of it.
--Hiram
"I assume he thought... That in December...
ReplyDeleteThe Senate had passed a bill with $0 for barriers.
The House had passed a bill with $5.7 billion for barriers.
He agreed to sign a bill with $5.7 billion for barriers."
No, Trump agreed to sign the Senate bill, then backed off when Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter jerked his chain and he came to heel.
"Then the DEMs came in and foolishly drew a $0 red line for for barriers"
If Trump wanted $5.7B for barriers, he had two years to do it with a GOP Congress and the powers of reconciliation. Nancy Pelosi ain't bound by Paul Ryan's offer.
The reality is of course, that there are all kinds of deals to be made, and that the money really isn't the issue. It would be pretty easy to fashion a deal for border security, one that might possibly involve spending considerably more than 5.7 billion dollars. But in making that kind of deal, Trump would have to give up the idea that he has achieved a political victory over the Democrats. And the reason that deal doesn't happen is that the political victory is the only thing he really wants.
ReplyDelete--Hiram
I think Trump should take the Democrat Colin Peterson's deal.
ReplyDeleteHiram,
ReplyDeleteI do agree that this simply a power struggle between DEM leadership and Trump.
Nothing more or less.
I do agree that this simply a power struggle between DEM leadership and Trump.
ReplyDeleteI don't know why it would make sense to spend 5.7 billion dollars resolve a power struggle. And the very least we should keep the bill for that in seven figures at most.
--Hiram
I like Collin Peterson and his common sense proposal. No wonder he keeps getting elected.
ReplyDeleteCollin just wants to throw money at a problem. Not Democrats at their best.
ReplyDelete--Hiram
I understand why you like it, because his position is "capitulate to Trump".
ReplyDeleteAnd now, he caves, taking the deal he could have had in December. The Master Negotiator strikes again!
ReplyDeleteHopefully the DEMs play nice during the next few weeks or we may be here again...
ReplyDeleteNo money for the socialist wall. If you want to build it, privatize it. I don't want my tax money going to pay for the wall.
ReplyDeleteMoose
I don’t want my money going to promote having more kids than you care for... But negotiation and democracy have their goog and bad aspects.
ReplyDelete"Hopefully the DEMs play nice during the next few weeks or we may be here again..."
ReplyDeleteWell, that's revealing.
Oh John, your and jerry's support of a socialist solution to the "border problem" is cute.
ReplyDeleteMoose
What do think it reveals?
ReplyDeleteI think it just means that during negotiations both sides need to give some of what the other party wants.
Pelosi drew her red line.
ReplyDeleteNow she will need to cross this boundary of her own making. Just as Trump did.
Otherwise she will be the creator of the problem.
Moose,
ReplyDeleteDo consider policemen to be a socialist solution?
Of course. It's socialized cost for the benefit of all. Something Republicans hate.
ReplyDeleteMoose
Sorry for missing words. I am at Alton alps watching the girl race. And I hate typing on my phone. 😁
ReplyDeleteActually the GOP loves police, law and order.
ReplyDeleteThus our support for a barrier to dissuade law breaking and law breakers.
"I think it just means that during negotiations both sides need to give some of what the other party wants."
ReplyDeleteWell, Trump needs to do the same. (Re-opening the government doesn't count.) But, of course, that's not mentioned.
"Actually the GOP loves police, law and order."
ReplyDeleteHave you heard the guy you voted for talk about the FBI?
Actually opening the government and swallowing his pride was a major concession.
ReplyDeleteLet’s see how well Nancy does at doing so.
about:
ReplyDelete"Pelosi drew her red line.
Now she will need to cross this boundary of her own making. Just as Trump did.
Otherwise she will be the creator of the problem."
It is not normal to shut down the govt to try to get your way. Obama did not do this to get a path for citizenship for the dreamers. If congress does not support or go along with the president's priorities so sad to bad. He should have funded the wall when he had a GOP congress.
I hope they pass a lwa that prohibits shut downs.
"Actually opening the government and swallowing his pride was a major concession."
ReplyDeleteNo, it isn't.
"Actually the GOP loves police, law and order."
ReplyDeleteYou changed the subject. Try again to respond to me on topic. Okay? Thanks.
Moose
Interesting. Trump gives Pelosi what she craves in exchange for "real border security" according to the "experts." Now Pelosi has to deliver on HER promise, no more excuses. Care to bet $5.7 billion she does what is good for the country, rather than more bombast and intransigence?
ReplyDeleteI don’t think Pelosi will negotiate in good faith. Hopefully I am wrong.
ReplyDeleteThankfully the GOP controls the Presidency and Senate.
I am so HAPPY to have divided government back!!! 😁
ReplyDeleteShe is already posturing about the state of the union date.
ReplyDeleteThis does not bode well.
Seems to me that the SOTU will be "check" on Pelosi. He can tell the world HE cares about border security, HE cares about goverment workers, and HE cares about disaster relief and HE cares about the DACA kids, and she does not. Then he can say he is waiting for her to prove that she cares, rather than raw politics. And he can blame the delayed SoTU on her, too. 5 moves ahead.
ReplyDeleteHe can TELL the world that, but since he has proven to be a liar, nobody but the True Believers(TM) will believe him.
ReplyDeleteMoose
Hooray for us 50 million True Believers.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately I don,t think Trump is that smart to self controlled.
ReplyDeleteOdds are he will blame exaggerate and possibly lie instead of capitalizing on this wonderful opportunity.
He really has to cut those far right nut jobs lose if he wants to make effective deals.
To be more specific which far right nut jobs in this case...
ReplyDeleteThose who want to not give DACA & Temporary refugees a path to citizenship.
THAT is how you define "far right nutjobs"? That is the LAW as it stands! What Trump is doing is enforcing the law that Obama arbitrarily suspended! You need to adjust the center on your "nutjob meter" WAY farther to the right, until at half or more of elected Democrats fall off the other end.
ReplyDeleteJerry,
ReplyDeleteWhat the law is today is not as important as where the perspectives are today to determining who are the far right nut jobs.
Sixty-five percent of Americans said they favor giving legal status to DREAMers, as a deadline set by President Trump quickly approaches for when temporary status will run out for hundreds of thousands of DACA recipients. That includes 81 percent of Democrats, 51 percent of Republicans and 66 percent of independents. (DACA, or Deferred Actions for Childhood Arrivals, is the executive order signed by former President Obama and rescinded by President Trump.)
The big problem right now is the Far Right Half of the GOP.
Disagree. The problem right now is that Trump has offered such status to the current DREAMERS and more, but Democrats repeatedly refuse to accept yes for an answer.
ReplyDeleteOh, and "where the law today is not as important..."???
ReplyDeleteWrong ... VOX List of Proposals
ReplyDeleteIt is the far right who is preventing us from solving this.
Let's consider the whole sentence. Not just cherry pick.
"What the law is today is not as important as where the perspectives are today to determining who are the far right nut jobs."
Ah, the famous liberal "situational ethics." "far right" is exactly where it has always been. The center has been allowed to creep far to the left of the rational.
ReplyDeleteNot situational, just fluid and improving.
ReplyDeleteOur society is not some static thing, or slavery would still be legal and only white men would be able to vote.
And please remember that US immigration policy is much more conservative and protectionist than it was in the past.