The backlash begins on the end of the shut down

[Anonymous]

Liberal activists are furious at the decision by Schumer and other Democrats to end the shut down.

I am sure when the shut down started Democrats did not anticipate that it could end up backfiring on them:


Liberal activists are furious with Democratic senators after most of them agreed to reopen the federal government without a firm path to shielding young immigrants from deportation.

As the third day of the shutdown dawned, liberal advocates and immigration groups fired off a joint statement blasting as "unacceptable" Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-Ky.) offer to merely hold a vote on immigration — with no promises for action from the House or White House — in exchange for Democratic votes to reopen the government. But three hours later, Democratic senators agreed to just those terms — sparking anger on the left.

"Millions of people flooded the streets of every major American city to stand up to Trump this weekend," tweeted Leah Greenberg, the co-executive director of the influential activist network Indivisible. "Your constituents want you to fight. How can you possibly not understand that?"

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Monday argued Democrats secured critical assurance for Dreamers, who are at risk for deportation as soon as March after President Donald Trump's decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/22/government-shutdown-deal-liberals-angry-357268

[Anonymous]

I think the strategy has potential. Dems took CHiP off the board. They also got a key concession from McConnell. If they get passage in the Senate, that forces Ryan to act in the House, because he's unlikely to want to be the focal point of the anti-immigrant rage. And many Republican House members really don't want to vote against a DACA fix in the 6 months before midterms. So it all falls on Trump and whether he has the balls to veto it. I say he doesn't have the balls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the strategy has potential. Dems took CHiP off the board. They also got a key concession from McConnell. If they get passage in the Senate, that forces Ryan to act in the House, because he's unlikely to want to be the focal point of the anti-immigrant rage. And many Republican House members really don't want to vote against a DACA fix in the 6 months before midterms. So it all falls on Trump and whether he has the balls to veto it. I say he doesn't have the balls.

Yep - there's a reason why Republicans have avoided a straight up-or-down vote on DACA for the last year. It's because they know some of them are on thin ice in their home districts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the strategy has potential. Dems took CHiP off the board. They also got a key concession from McConnell. If they get passage in the Senate, that forces Ryan to act in the House, because he's unlikely to want to be the focal point of the anti-immigrant rage. And many Republican House members really don't want to vote against a DACA fix in the 6 months before midterms. So it all falls on Trump and whether he has the balls to veto it. I say he doesn't have the balls.

+1 and what, is the Indivisble team going to start identifying primary challengers against Progressive Dems?? Not likely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the strategy has potential. Dems took CHiP off the board. They also got a key concession from McConnell. If they get passage in the Senate, that forces Ryan to act in the House, because he's unlikely to want to be the focal point of the anti-immigrant rage. And many Republican House members really don't want to vote against a DACA fix in the 6 months before midterms. So it all falls on Trump and whether he has the balls to veto it. I say he doesn't have the balls.

Yep - there's a reason why Republicans have avoided a straight up-or-down vote on DACA for the last year. It's because they know some of them are on thin ice in their home districts.

Not sure where McConnell agreed to a straight up or down vote; there could be multiple amendments that are included that are immigration related and non-immigration which may be unpalatable for Democrats.

Where is the assurance that the House will go along with any of this - after all, it was the House that killed the last attempt at comprehensive immigration reform when GWB was president.

[Anonymous]

There is too much over-reaction on both sides.

For the right, this is a temporary "win."

For the left, it provides an opportunity to get Senators on the record:

1) McConnell: is he an honest broker or not?
2) Trump: does he really want a bill with love
3) Ryan, he has said he is for DACA. If the Senate passes a bill, he will be forced to bring it to the floor. Will he?

A "no" answer on any of these questions will have a severe backlash with the American public (while also being a disaster for actual DACA recipients.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is too much over-reaction on both sides.

For the right, this is a temporary "win."

For the left, it provides an opportunity to get Senators on the record:

1) McConnell: is he an honest broker or not?
2) Trump: does he really want a bill with love
3) Ryan, he has said he is for DACA. If the Senate passes a bill, he will be forced to bring it to the floor. Will he?

A "no" answer on any of these questions will have a severe backlash with the American public (while also being a disaster for actual DACA recipients.)

Re 1: do you think he really cares what Democrats think of him?
Re 2: Trump will not agree to anything that is likely to turn his base against him
Re 3: Ryan's main goal is to keep his caucus intact and not rebelling and he will not go against them

Finally, the DACA relief bill may have no resemblance to what Democrats want.

[Anonymous]

I'm with Dianne Feinstein on this one. It is great the the government is reopening, as a shutdown has real consequences. But this is essentially what was on the table Friday, so basically they shut down the government and caused major disruption for nothing.

And if the Dems think the Republicans will make a deal on DACA based on some wishy-washy agreement to address immigration issues, I've got a bridge to sell them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm with Dianne Feinstein on this one. It is great the the government is reopening, as a shutdown has real consequences. But this is essentially what was on the table Friday, so basically they shut down the government and caused major disruption for nothing.

And if the Dems think the Republicans will make a deal on DACA based on some wishy-washy agreement to address immigration issues, I've got a bridge to sell them.

+1 to all of this

[Anonymous]

Why did Sen. Cochran reject Sen. Burr's request to amend language regarding the US IC portion of the bill passed today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the strategy has potential. Dems took CHiP off the board. They also got a key concession from McConnell. If they get passage in the Senate, that forces Ryan to act in the House, because he's unlikely to want to be the focal point of the anti-immigrant rage. And many Republican House members really don't want to vote against a DACA fix in the 6 months before midterms. So it all falls on Trump and whether he has the balls to veto it. I say he doesn't have the balls.

+1 and what, is the Indivisble team going to start identifying primary challengers against Progressive Dems?? Not likely.

Just how many are in the Big Progressive Dem group? I'm a DEM and wanted my govt to NOT shut down. The group and the media have coined the label Progressive but progress towards what?

Not eliminating slavery which my family fought to do in the Civil War. Not the Civil Rights movement. Not getting out of Vietnam. Not entering WW1 and WW2. They want illegal immigration. Excuse me but even in 1855 we knew who got off the boats. Some people walked across the border from Canada or Mexico but nothing like this...

Give me progress on equitable funding for illegal immigrants and Obama's minor surge.

[Anonymous]

The only senator who voted against the deal that surprises me is Jon Tester from Montana.

The others who voted against it are in reliably blue states:

Blumenthal
Booker
Cortez Masto
Feinstein
Gillibrand
Harris
Hirono
Leahy
Markey
Menendez
Merkley
Murphy
Sanders
Tester
Warren
Wyden

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is too much over-reaction on both sides.

For the right, this is a temporary "win."

For the left, it provides an opportunity to get Senators on the record:

1) McConnell: is he an honest broker or not?
2) Trump: does he really want a bill with love
3) Ryan, he has said he is for DACA. If the Senate passes a bill, he will be forced to bring it to the floor. Will he?

A "no" answer on any of these questions will have a severe backlash with the American public (while also being a disaster for actual DACA recipients.)

It's not a win for the far right or the far left. The true winner is my country, the USA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only senator who voted against the deal that surprises me is Jon Tester from Montana.

The others who voted against it are in reliably blue states:

Blumenthal
Booker
Cortez Masto
Feinstein
Gillibrand
Harris
Hirono
Leahy
Markey
Menendez
Merkley
Murphy
Sanders
Tester
Warren
Wyden

Rand Paul also voted against it.

[Anonymous]

^^^ And Mike Lee