How Long Will The Shutdown Last? (Dec 2018)

[GannonFan]

There was a compromise solution BEFORE the shutdown.

The Senate voted on a solution unanimously. The House was about to vote on it... Then Trump threw a temper tantrum in a meeting with Ryan... and then Ryan never put it up to vote.

Well, the President is part of the legislative process the last time I read the Constitution. Political parties in Congress tend not to part ways, especially on big issues, with Presidents of the same party very often.

[GannonFan]

There was a compromise solution BEFORE the shutdown.

The Senate voted on a solution unanimously. The House was about to vote on it... Then Trump threw a temper tantrum in a meeting with Ryan... and then Ryan never put it up to vote.

It's insane that people forget less than a week ago, Congress was controlled by Conks AND they had the votes to push whatever bill they wanted through. Yet they bowed down to Trump.

The filibuster still exists for many things in the Senate, no? I don't recall the GOP having a supermajority in the Senate to pass anything they wanted to pass.

[Skjellyfetti]

They passed it unanimously. I bolded it the first time so it wouldn't be missed. But, of course it was.

[GannonFan]

They passed it unanimously. I bolded it the first time so it wouldn't be missed. But, of course it was.

No filibuster. Veto proof.

And again, last I checked, the President is still part of the legislative process, no matter how detestable he his. Has the Constitution changed on that? Did I miss an amendment? Passing something unanimously without making sure the President is going to be okay with it is a mistake from the GOP - they didn't get a good read on what he'd sign and what he wouldn't (and I'm sure he's to blame for much of that) - very rarely do legislators of the same party as the President put forth legislation they know he's going to veto and dare him to do so. Heck, McConnell made a living out of making sure no bill got out of the Senate that Obama was going to have to veto. It's how the legislative process works.

[dbackjon]

The chaos is where the real costs of the shutdown creep in. I was a construction contracting officer in the previous shutdown, and we had to stop-work massive multi-million dollar projects. The increased equipment rental terms, the increased per diem, the inefficiency... all of those things have real dollar consequences that eventually get paid by the Government. The last shutdown cost the taxpayer $52.5M per day according to OMB.

I think of the real impact to lives. I wonder what the minimum wage people who clean my office are doing right now. I wonder about all the NIB/NISH people (blind and severely handicapped) on contract whose daily routine is completely thrown out of whack and what their caregivers are doing when they are bringing in no money. I wonder about all of the food truck vendors who usually have a line of me and my coworkers starting to line up each day right about now.

Real bills start getting missed this week for people who live paycheck to paycheck. 800,000 civil servants miss a paycheck this Friday. Active duty Coast Guard will miss a paycheck on Tuesday of next week.

All because three people refuse to compromise.

Yeah! We gotta keep the brown people out! They're taking our jobs!

I agree with you 100% - this shutdown is prick waving and nothing more. Real people are getting hurt. But somehow, I don't see Trump's base abandoning him because of it.

Trump Voter in Florida (who isn't getting paid for her Federal Prison work)

“I voted for him, and he’s the one who’s doing this,” she said of Mr. Trump. “I thought he was going to do good things. He’s not hurting the people he needs to be hurting.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/07/us/f ... MqyndmnGJM

[Ibanez]

Rush will fix this.

[GannonFan]

Yeah! We gotta keep the brown people out! They're taking our jobs!

I agree with you 100% - this shutdown is prick waving and nothing more. Real people are getting hurt. But somehow, I don't see Trump's base abandoning him because of it.

Trump Voter in Florida (who isn't getting paid for her Federal Prison work)

“I voted for him, and he’s the one who’s doing this,” she said of Mr. Trump. “I thought he was going to do good things. He’s not hurting the people he needs to be hurting.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/07/us/f ... MqyndmnGJM

Isn't that grand? Politics gets down to bare knuckles and is about hurting other people. Way to go partisans, the transformation of the political sphere is complete. Well done.

[∞∞∞]

They passed it unanimously. I bolded it the first time so it wouldn't be missed. But, of course it was.

No filibuster. Veto proof.

And again, last I checked, the President is still part of the legislative process, no matter how detestable he his. Has the Constitution changed on that? Did I miss an amendment? Passing something unanimously without making sure the President is going to be okay with it is a mistake from the GOP - they didn't get a good read on what he'd sign and what he wouldn't (and I'm sure he's to blame for much of that) - very rarely do legislators of the same party as the President put forth legislation they know he's going to veto and dare him to do so. Heck, McConnell made a living out of making sure no bill got out of the Senate that Obama was going to have to veto. It's how the legislative process works.

The Executive branch has every right to be a part of the process; the Legislative branch has every right to ignore the President, regardless if they're the same party or not. The GOP controlled everything AND had bipartisan support for funding the government. The Dems are sending the Senate the exact same stuff the GOP previously and overwhelmingly supported....this can end ASAP.

There's a reason the majority of Americans blame the Trump/GOP; it's literally Party over Country.

[Ibanez]

Trump Voter in Florida (who isn't getting paid for her Federal Prison work)

“I voted for him, and he’s the one who’s doing this,” she said of Mr. Trump. “I thought he was going to do good things. He’s not hurting the people he needs to be hurting.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/07/us/f ... MqyndmnGJM

Isn't that grand? Politics gets down to bare knuckles and is about hurting other people. Way to go partisans, the transformation of the political sphere is complete. Well done.

That's a capstone course at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.

[Ibanez]

And again, last I checked, the President is still part of the legislative process, no matter how detestable he his. Has the Constitution changed on that? Did I miss an amendment? Passing something unanimously without making sure the President is going to be okay with it is a mistake from the GOP - they didn't get a good read on what he'd sign and what he wouldn't (and I'm sure he's to blame for much of that) - very rarely do legislators of the same party as the President put forth legislation they know he's going to veto and dare him to do so. Heck, McConnell made a living out of making sure no bill got out of the Senate that Obama was going to have to veto. It's how the legislative process works.

The Executive branch has every right to be a part of the process; the Legislative branch has every right to ignore the President, regardless if they're the same party or not. The GOP controlled everything AND had bipartisan support for funding the government. The Dems are sending the Senate the exact same stuff the GOP previously and overwhelmingly supported....this can end ASAP.

There's a reason the majority of Americans blame the Trump/GOP; it's literally Party over Country.

Both parties are putting Party over country. It's been that way for a good decade or more. Why can't you see that?

[mainejeff]

And so this is where we are at....this will play out over a period of years and a number of elections. Eventually one party will lose more voters to death than the other one. Can you guess which one?

[GannonFan]

And so this is where we are at....this will play out over a period of years and a number of elections. Eventually one party will lose more voters to death than the other one. Can you guess which one?

And just like JSO, your alluding to the idea that we won't have two fairly equal political parties (in terms of electoral success) in the near future will be wrong. Somehow for the past 230 years we've had two fairly equal political parties - the names have changed over time, but we keep coming back to two. I don't think we really like consensus - we're wired to like argument more.

[mainejeff]

And so this is where we are at....this will play out over a period of years and a number of elections. Eventually one party will lose more voters to death than the other one. Can you guess which one?

And just like JSO, your alluding to the idea that we won't have two fairly equal political parties (in terms of electoral success) in the near future will be wrong. Somehow for the past 230 years we've had two fairly equal political parties - the names have changed over time, but we keep coming back to two. I don't think we really like consensus - we're wired to like argument more.

White Population in U.S. (obviously this excludes Native Americans) -

1610 - 100%
1700 - 88.9%
1800 - 81.1%
1900 - 87.9%
1950 - 89.5%
1960 - 88.6%
1970 - 87.7%
1980 - 83.1%
1990 - 80.3%
2000 - 75.1%
2010 - 72.4%

So Mr. White Honky.....white Euros that "invaded" this country in the late 1800s to early 1900s aren't coming here to rescue your party. They have turned brown...and unless you want this country to stagnate & rot from the inside out....you better embrace the new era of politics arriving in the next 10-20 years.

[GannonFan]

And just like JSO, your alluding to the idea that we won't have two fairly equal political parties (in terms of electoral success) in the near future will be wrong. Somehow for the past 230 years we've had two fairly equal political parties - the names have changed over time, but we keep coming back to two. I don't think we really like consensus - we're wired to like argument more.

White Population in U.S. (obviously this excludes Native Americans) -

1610 - 100%
1700 - 88.9%
1800 - 81.1%
1900 - 87.9%
1950 - 89.5%
1960 - 88.6%
1970 - 87.7%
1980 - 83.1%
1990 - 80.3%
2000 - 75.1%
2010 - 72.4%

So Mr. White Honky.....white Euros that "invaded" this country in the late 1800s to early 1900s aren't coming here to rescue your party. They have turned brown...and unless you want this country to stagnate & rot from the inside out....you better embrace the new era of politics arriving in the next 10-20 years.

Well, 1) I don't have a party. I'm like the cafeteria Catholic that I am - I pick and choose what I like from either side of the lunch line. and 2) the White population has always been split on either side of the political divide - once everyone's Brown why do you think the color of their skin is going to manifest itself into one particular political party? Do you really believe that 200+ years of history with two major political parties is solely because Whites were the majority race? Talk about a non sequitur.

[AZGrizFan]

And so this is where we are at....this will play out over a period of years and a number of elections. Eventually one party will lose more voters to death than the other one. Can you guess which one?

The one who’s two “leaders” are a combined 170?

[AZGrizFan]

Yeah! We gotta keep the brown people out! They're taking our jobs!

I agree with you 100% - this shutdown is prick waving and nothing more. Real people are getting hurt. But somehow, I don't see Trump's base abandoning him because of it.

Trump Voter in Florida (who isn't getting paid for her Federal Prison work)

“I voted for him, and he’s the one who’s doing this,” she said of Mr. Trump. “I thought he was going to do good things. He’s not hurting the people he needs to be hurting.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/07/us/f ... MqyndmnGJM

Just taking from the Rahm Emannuel/Hildabeast playbook: we kick em when they’re down; civility will return once OUR party is in control...you know, all that civil political discourse bullshit?

[houndawg]

I'm a little confused, and perhaps I'm misunderstanding the situation, but why don't Senate Republicans override Trump's veto of the spending bill? Both the Senate and House had bipartisan agreements on the bill without the wall...and then Trump vetoed it.

But now the Senate - still controlled by Republicans - won't even take up a vote until Trump is on board (even though the same plan is on the table). Since everyone was initially good with the budget, it seems like the votes are there to override the President...but I guess Trump has the GOP by the balls.

Why doesnt Nancy just trade DACA for the wall?

hmm


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My guess from the outside would be because she doesn't have to. Mushroomdick told the entire world on live TV that he would gladly take responsibility for shutting down the gubmint, that he would "wear the mantle", so they're going to let him. Every time the gubmint shuts down the republicans get blamed - ended Newt Gingrich's career as I recall. It seems as natural as breathing that the donks want to get some payback first, then they'll be willing to talk about compromise. Me, I guess I could live with a useless and totally ineffective wall as long as the DoD pays and their budget remains the same through the life of the project. But if I were Pelosi I'd bust balls as long as possible. Demand the military out of Syria and Afghanistan so the funds can be used for a wall. (Since we won't have to worry about "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here" anymore.)

[houndawg]

And so this is where we are at....this will play out over a period of years and a number of elections. Eventually one party will lose more voters to death than the other one. Can you guess which one?

And just like JSO, your alluding to the idea that we won't have two fairly equal political parties (in terms of electoral success) in the near future will be wrong. Somehow for the past 230 years we've had two fairly equal political parties - the names have changed over time, but we keep coming back to two. I don't think we really like consensus - we're wired to like argument more.

How can a guy spend time here and come to that conclusion?

[houndawg]

And so this is where we are at....this will play out over a period of years and a number of elections. Eventually one party will lose more voters to death than the other one. Can you guess which one?

The one who’s two “leaders” are a combined 170?

They're not even 150 yet...

[JohnStOnge]

One thing I do agree with that the Trump Administration is doing is allowing people access to certain things while the shutdown is going on. Snapped this photo when I went to Cameron Prairie Refuge to see what was going on:



It's hard to read but the idea is that the public is allowed access as long as no effort is needed to ensure safety, etc. So I was able to go fishing.

At the same time, I have never agreed with Presidents holding the government hostage to get spending they want. I didn't agree with Clinton doing it in 1995/1996. I didn't agree with Obama doing it in 2013.

And this one is especially bad because of all the pomp Trump did during the campaign where he said Mexico is going to pay for it.

[css75]

Trip must subscribe to the AOC position of accuracy is not as important than being morally right...

He is mis-reading the Slate talking points...the President never vetoed a spending bill...The Senate Majority leader said he would not forward a bill to the floor for a vote if the President didn’t support it, and the President has said no wall, no sign...and lots of Republican senators agree with that position...

So force Trump to veto it, and then take it up again. But they don't have the balls.

The House is sending the GOP bills the GOP came up with; there's really no excuse here.

The majority of Americans don't want the wall and so far, polling shows most Americans are putting the blame on Trump and the GOP. You gotta remember, Conks controlled all chambers when this thing started.

Show me something that says majority don’t want wall. Just because you don’t doesn’t mean most people agree with you. Based on this forum you are usually in the minority.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[houndawg]

So force Trump to veto it, and then take it up again. But they don't have the balls.

The House is sending the GOP bills the GOP came up with; there's really no excuse here.

The majority of Americans don't want the wall and so far, polling shows most Americans are putting the blame on Trump and the GOP. You gotta remember, Conks controlled all chambers when this thing started.

Show me something that says majority don’t want wall. Just because you don’t doesn’t mean most people agree with you. Based on this forum you are usually in the minority.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Todays report was 55% blame Trump, 35% blame the Democrats. He's lost all but the base.

Conks had the entire gubmint to themselves for two years and did nothing. This is about diverting attention from Mueller. Anybody see the "fuckup" by Manafort's attorney's on the news earlier? I think Manafort is thinking that his best chance of avoiding a Polonium cocktail is behind bars.

[93henfan]

So force Trump to veto it, and then take it up again. But they don't have the balls.

The House is sending the GOP bills the GOP came up with; there's really no excuse here.

The majority of Americans don't want the wall and so far, polling shows most Americans are putting the blame on Trump and the GOP. You gotta remember, Conks controlled all chambers when this thing started.

Show me something that says majority don’t want wall. Just because you don’t doesn’t mean most people agree with you. Based on this forum you are usually in the minority.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

https://news.gallup.com/poll/235775/ame ... -daca.aspx

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-de ... aseID=2590

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content ... 051721.pdf

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... compromise

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-p ... -the-wall/

http://fortune.com/2018/12/12/trump-border-wall-poll/

[houndawg]

None ^ of that is inaccurate...



I would add to that
the average American doesn't really understand what a government shutdown is
and doesn't actually care either - unless they are told to care by somebody

It’s also half the story

These shutdowns are the product of a complete ossification in Congress, caused by a number of things but primarily the 24 hour infotainment cycle

Every congresscritter is shilling for each and every vote and that means the fringes of each base are in control - which means no quarter, no compromise under ANY circumstances.

Therefore, shutdowns (and they will become more common)

And that is precisely why the left is for open borders and full blown state communism, and the right is for Angry Jesus and an M1 Abrams in every garage

fake news.

[CID1990]

It’s also half the story

These shutdowns are the product of a complete ossification in Congress, caused by a number of things but primarily the 24 hour infotainment cycle

Every congresscritter is shilling for each and every vote and that means the fringes of each base are in control - which means no quarter, no compromise under ANY circumstances.

Therefore, shutdowns (and they will become more common)

And that is precisely why the left is for open borders and full blown state communism, and the right is for Angry Jesus and an M1 Abrams in every garage

fake news.

What other inference can you draw when they call the wall "immoral" (because then borders must be too)

Or that the one agency responsible for policing illegal immigration should be abolished

That's open borders, Clarence