Shutdown Over Border Security?

[JimL]

In other words:

Democrats are never wrong and no matter what, Republicans are guilty, no matter what.

No, go back and re-read the post. Apparently that comprehension problem of yours is still active.
No, I don't like careless tyrannical sociopathic terrorist hostage takers. This isn't a funding issue, it's a negotiation over border security. Besides, Mexico is going to pay for it, no you. Right?

[lilpixieofterror]

No, go back and re-read the post. Apparently that comprehension problem of yours is still active.

No, I don't like careless tyrannical sociopathic terrorist hostage takers. This isn't a funding issue, it's a negotiation over border security. Besides, Mexico is going to pay for it, no you. Right?

[firstfloor]

Assuming that is the case, how soon do you think it should end?

Usually, these things end when you have learned your lesson. We already know that POTUS is a very slow learner.

[firstfloor]

If this was Obama fighting for his pet project, how would you feel? And, do you have principles?
Cheney did this apparently; got America into a state of permanent civil unrest by lifting rules on balanced reporting.

[firstfloor]

[One Bad Pig]

Usually, these things end when you have learned your lesson. We already know that POTUS is a very slow learner.

Thanks for answering the question I should have asked. Next thing you know, you'll be a Mormon!

[Mountain Man]

President Trump acknowledged the separation of powers and conceded that it's Pelosi's prerogative to name the date for the State of the Union address, and that he will wait until after the shutdown to deliver it. So another level-headed concession from the President while Nancy refuses to even pull up a chair to the negotiating table. The funny thing is, the President is handing her one defeat after another, but she still thinks she's winning . As one commentator put it:

1. This puts pressure on Pelosi to answer his compromise with one of her own
2. Trump acknowledges the separation of powers (something Obama did not)
3. The president shows a softer side, clearly addressing his key 2020 weakness
Well-played. And cost him nothing.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...union-address/

[Bill the Cat]

No, the only reason Trump is digging in his

So our little news tourist knows more than a sitting House of Representatives Democrat who actually converses with Speaker Pelosi? You're proving every day just how little you actually know.

[lilpixieofterror]

If this was Obama fighting for his pet project, how would you feel? And, do you have principles?
Cheney did this apparently; got America into a state of permanent civil unrest by lifting rules on balanced reporting.

[Sparko]

Pelosi doesn't want to give in because it would make her look weak to give in to Trump after just becoming the Speaker of the House again. And Trump seems incapable of giving in unless he can save face.

I guess the Libertarians are finally going to get the government they all keep lobbying for: No government at all. I wonder if they will be happy?

[carpedm9587]

And now we have 30 some Democrats, led by freshman Rep. Elaine Luria of Virginia, who sent a letter to Pelosi saying that she needs to compromise with Trump and Collin Peterson (D-Minn) telling his Democratic colleagues to approve President Trump's request for funding a wall to end an "unnecessary" government shutdown adding "Why are we fighting over this? We're going to build that wall anyway, at some time."

And the number three Democrat in the House, Steny Hoyer appears to be breaking ranks with Democrat leadership. First he's contradicting Pelosi about Trump giving the SOTU in the House of Representatives and then declaring that he thinks that "physical barriers are part of the solution" as well as poo-pooing the leftist mantra that walls are automatically "immoral" stating that "it depends on what a wall is used for whether it's moral or immoral. If it's protecting people it's moral, if it's imprisoning people it may well be immoral, but that's not issue."

I'll assume he isn't referring to walls surrounding jails which imprison those within yet protect those outside from them isn't what he meant but rather things like the Berlin Wall which kept the citizens of East Germany from leaving.

I think, if you read the letters and what they are saying, they are very clear that they are NOT breaking with Pelosi (with the exception of AOC). They are asking for what I earlier said the Dems need to do: put forward their own counter proposal and have a vote on it. That appears to be what they are moving towards. They are currently moving to meet Trump's $5.7B number for various border security initiatives - minus funding for any new "structures."

Personally, I think that's a mistake. If there is a need for new wall at strategic locations, that should be identified and included in the bill. What I don't think should be in the bill is money for Trump to just toss up wall anyplace he darn pleases just so he can appease his base. Someone needs to identify the "strategic locations," justify them with data, and then include them in the bill.

[Bill the Cat]

I think, if you read the letters and what they are saying, they are very clear that they are NOT breaking with Pelosi (with the exception of AOC). They are asking for what I earlier said the Dems need to do: put forward their own counter proposal and have a vote on it. That appears to be what they are moving towards. They are currently moving to meet Trump's $5.7B number for various border security initiatives - minus funding for any new "structures."

Personally, I think that's a mistake. If there is a need for new wall at strategic locations, that should be identified and included in the bill. What I don't think should be in the bill is money for Trump to just toss up wall anyplace he darn pleases just so he can appease his base. Someone needs to identify the "strategic locations," justify them with data, and then include them in the bill.

You do realize that Trump won't be personally overseeing the fund or the construction, right?

[carpedm9587]

You do realize that Trump won't be personally overseeing the fund or the construction, right?

Yes, I'm aware. But I think it is reasonable for some boundaries to be placed on where and how the money is being spent - especially given the two parties have significant differences on how border security should be approached.

[carpedm9587]

So far, the tide is not in Trump's favor. Although his base has not budged one iota (and I doubt anyone expects it to), he is apparently losing those "middle" voters, especially independents - and by significant numbers. Hopefully, the recent Dem move to increase the offer to his number will further erode his position.

[carpedm9587]

So it looks like Trump is still preparing for a possible emergency declaration, assuming the actual presence of the text of this declaration is an indication of its accuracy.

I find myself with mixed feelings on this one. On one hand, I shudder to think that Trump will discover just how much power a chief executive has and get a taste for it. That could truly usher in a constitutional crisis. On the other hand, I would be curious to see how his base defends exactly the kind of power grab they formerly accused Obama of doing. After all, the reason for this action would be that he "can't get anything through Congress," which was pretty much exactly Obama's reason. And I actually want him to do it when I consider the likely reaction from the electorate. I suspect his polls will drop even further and he will essentially be ensuring that 2020 is a loss for him, and possibly for both the House and Senate as well. And if THAT happens, despite the significant gerrymandering that favors Republicans (i.e., Operation Red Map), that does not bode well for the future of the "Grand old Party."

It would be ironic indeed if "the wall" ends up being what buries Trump.