How long will the shutdown last?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The great deal maker is failing bigly at making a deal.

Tough to deal when your alleged negotiating party just keeps saying no, right? It’s kind of like Trump is seeking peace from the Palestinian side and Demicrats are the Likud Party. No, no, no!

The conman can only con poorly educated people. The deal he offered is no deal. He created the DACA issue by harassing the DACA recipients. And now he offers a deal he won't harass them for 3 years. Thats no deal. Thats hostage taking and blackmailing. He can only fool his cult NOT the rest of the world who can think.

Not sure what to make of this weird word salad.

Not PP. But if you don't understand, maybe you need to take some English language for foreigners course.

Seems like Trump has made a proposal? What is Team Nancy doing to help feds?

I've lost count of the number of appropriation bills she has passed recently to reopen the government. Maybe you can look it up if you're interested.

Here’s the thing. That’s not negotiating. Republicans control the Senate and the Presidency (the last one is tough to believe, right?). So she has to make serious, reasonable proposals in response to these dynamics. Doing something that Mitch has said won’t happen is not serious on these circumstances. It’s a face saving gesture for her gullible base.

Don't lie. This is all about Trump. The House passed the same budget that made it unanimously through the Senate last month, but then Speaker Ryan refused to bring up in the House. The only thing that changed between the two votes was Trump said he wouldn't sign the budget.

+1

We had a passable budget. Figure it out, GOP.

It's not passable if Trump won't sign. Pelosi needs to send up a bill that includes most of what Trump wants, but not everything - or, everything that Trump wants, and a bit more that Nancy wants. It's called negotiation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The great deal maker is failing bigly at making a deal.

Tough to deal when your alleged negotiating party just keeps saying no, right? It’s kind of like Trump is seeking peace from the Palestinian side and Demicrats are the Likud Party. No, no, no!

The conman can only con poorly educated people. The deal he offered is no deal. He created the DACA issue by harassing the DACA recipients. And now he offers a deal he won't harass them for 3 years. Thats no deal. Thats hostage taking and blackmailing. He can only fool his cult NOT the rest of the world who can think.

Not sure what to make of this weird word salad.

Not PP. But if you don't understand, maybe you need to take some English language for foreigners course.

Seems like Trump has made a proposal? What is Team Nancy doing to help feds?

I've lost count of the number of appropriation bills she has passed recently to reopen the government. Maybe you can look it up if you're interested.

Here’s the thing. That’s not negotiating. Republicans control the Senate and the Presidency (the last one is tough to believe, right?). So she has to make serious, reasonable proposals in response to these dynamics. Doing something that Mitch has said won’t happen is not serious on these circumstances. It’s a face saving gesture for her gullible base.

Don't lie. This is all about Trump. The House passed the same budget that made it unanimously through the Senate last month, but then Speaker Ryan refused to bring up in the House. The only thing that changed between the two votes was Trump said he wouldn't sign the budget.

That’s not a “lie,” so please stop with the zombie-like talking points. The current dynamics are what matter at this point. You have no answer for why Team Nancy isn’t negotiating. So that’s that. Saying this is “all about Trump” is not an argument. Perhaps what you’re trying to say is that the Democratic leadership simply should not reach an agreement if it gives Trump something of what he wants. I fail to see how that’s a grown up view.

No negotiating until the government is opened. That's the position and you know it. Stop being a moron.

If Nancy won't negotiate until Trump accepts her spending proposal, then why would she negotiate AFTER he gives in and she gets what she wants? There would be no reason to. She got what she wanted.

We you in a coma throughout high school (note that I'm not mentioning college)? THE GOVERNMENT GETS OPENED, THEN WALL NEGOTIATIONS COMMENCE.

Yes, I noted you insulted my completed level of education, which is the typical lib insult.

Did you hear the venom and hate spewing from Schumer and Pelosi following Trump's olive branch? You think they will give an inch once the government opens? They'd have no reason to. They'd think, "the Republicans caved as usual, and we got what we wanted. A spending bill that still allows illegal immigrants an easy path in."

No dice. They want the government open? Well they need to make a reasonable counteroffer.

Extending temporary relief to DACA (which the courts already granted), and having that apply to fewer people, is not an "olive branch." It's an insulting illusory promise of no consequence.

Open the government. Discuss border security in the legislative process. That has been the way our government has operated since inception: bills negotiated in committee, with hearings, and a vote. Not rammed through the budget process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The great deal maker is failing bigly at making a deal.

Tough to deal when your alleged negotiating party just keeps saying no, right? It’s kind of like Trump is seeking peace from the Palestinian side and Demicrats are the Likud Party. No, no, no!

The conman can only con poorly educated people. The deal he offered is no deal. He created the DACA issue by harassing the DACA recipients. And now he offers a deal he won't harass them for 3 years. Thats no deal. Thats hostage taking and blackmailing. He can only fool his cult NOT the rest of the world who can think.

Not sure what to make of this weird word salad.

Not PP. But if you don't understand, maybe you need to take some English language for foreigners course.

Seems like Trump has made a proposal? What is Team Nancy doing to help feds?

I've lost count of the number of appropriation bills she has passed recently to reopen the government. Maybe you can look it up if you're interested.

Here’s the thing. That’s not negotiating. Republicans control the Senate and the Presidency (the last one is tough to believe, right?). So she has to make serious, reasonable proposals in response to these dynamics. Doing something that Mitch has said won’t happen is not serious on these circumstances. It’s a face saving gesture for her gullible base.

Don't lie. This is all about Trump. The House passed the same budget that made it unanimously through the Senate last month, but then Speaker Ryan refused to bring up in the House. The only thing that changed between the two votes was Trump said he wouldn't sign the budget.

+1

We had a passable budget. Figure it out, GOP.

It's not passable if Trump won't sign. Pelosi needs to send up a bill that includes most of what Trump wants, but not everything - or, everything that Trump wants, and a bit more that Nancy wants. It's called negotiation.

There is a thing called a veto override. If more then 70 Senators support a bill, then there is nothing the President can do about it. The Senate had passed the very same bill Pelosi has sent several times, by a unanimous voice vote. Ergo, no, the President is irrelevant if the Senate is willing to re-vote on the EXACT SAME BILL it passsed unanimously before the shutdown.

[Anonymous]

This. The Senate and House could open up the government. McConnell has been choosing not to, they just need to be able to override a veto and I'm sure adults could get together and do that.

[Anonymous]

Good luck getting 70 senators. Despite what you believe, people in this country do want a wall and border security. Senators know this.

[Anonymous]

NYT is reporting that McConnell will allow a vote on the bill passed by the House to reopen without wall funding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The great deal maker is failing bigly at making a deal.

Tough to deal when your alleged negotiating party just keeps saying no, right? It’s kind of like Trump is seeking peace from the Palestinian side and Demicrats are the Likud Party. No, no, no!

The conman can only con poorly educated people. The deal he offered is no deal. He created the DACA issue by harassing the DACA recipients. And now he offers a deal he won't harass them for 3 years. Thats no deal. Thats hostage taking and blackmailing. He can only fool his cult NOT the rest of the world who can think.

Not sure what to make of this weird word salad.

Not PP. But if you don't understand, maybe you need to take some English language for foreigners course.

Seems like Trump has made a proposal? What is Team Nancy doing to help feds?

I've lost count of the number of appropriation bills she has passed recently to reopen the government. Maybe you can look it up if you're interested.

Here’s the thing. That’s not negotiating. Republicans control the Senate and the Presidency (the last one is tough to believe, right?). So she has to make serious, reasonable proposals in response to these dynamics. Doing something that Mitch has said won’t happen is not serious on these circumstances. It’s a face saving gesture for her gullible base.

Don't lie. This is all about Trump. The House passed the same budget that made it unanimously through the Senate last month, but then Speaker Ryan refused to bring up in the House. The only thing that changed between the two votes was Trump said he wouldn't sign the budget.

+1

We had a passable budget. Figure it out, GOP.

It's not passable if Trump won't sign. Pelosi needs to send up a bill that includes most of what Trump wants, but not everything - or, everything that Trump wants, and a bit more that Nancy wants. It's called negotiation.

There is a thing called a veto override. If more then 70 Senators support a bill, then there is nothing the President can do about it. The Senate had passed the very same bill Pelosi has sent several times, by a unanimous voice vote. Ergo, no, the President is irrelevant if the Senate is willing to re-vote on the EXACT SAME BILL it passsed unanimously before the shutdown.

Yes, yes.... I know about a veto override. No way the Senate has the votes for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good luck getting 70 senators. Despite what you believe, people in this country do want a wall and border security. Senators know this.

100 Senators voted for this already. I think at least 70 of them still would.

If the Wall was so popular, why did the GOP get creamed in 2018 making it the central issue? Yes, there is a group of Americans who want it, but it is neither the majority, nor the majority who live near the border. It is only the racists and idiots who think this is a good expenditure.

Welcome to the club, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good luck getting 70 senators. Despite what you believe, people in this country do want a wall and border security. Senators know this.

30 GOP senators, including many up for re-election in 2020, would need to explain to their constituents why the changed their vote from December to January. The optics on that would be horrible for them.

As it is, the optics aren't great and they know it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NYT is reporting that McConnell will allow a vote on the bill passed by the House to reopen without wall funding.

I don't think this is accurate. Link?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NYT is reporting that McConnell will allow a vote on the bill passed by the House to reopen without wall funding.

I don't think this is accurate. Link?

Don't have link but understand 2 votes: one on Trump's wall bill and the other on House bill.

[Anonymous]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/us/politics/government-shutdown-senate.html

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/22/politics/senate-vote-trump-border-wall-shutdown/index.html

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/426469-senate-to-vote-on-dueling-government-funding-bills

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NYT is reporting that McConnell will allow a vote on the bill passed by the House to reopen without wall funding.

I hope he does this soon so people can get paid before February 1st.
He can hold a vote to reopen the government today and schedule a vote for wall funding for later this week but these need to be separated
Government shutdowns should not be a legislating tactic
The FBI report on what happens after Friday if funding isn’t restored is really sobering

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/us/politics/government-shutdown-senate.html

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/22/politics/senate-vote-trump-border-wall-shutdown/index.html

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/426469-senate-to-vote-on-dueling-government-funding-bills

So some large number of GOP senators will need to explain why they supported a clean funding bill before the shutdown but oppose one now.

That will be heavily exploited during the election cycle.

And, there are plenty of GOP senators, like Murkowski, who will likely vote for both bills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NYT is reporting that McConnell will allow a vote on the bill passed by the House to reopen without wall funding.

I hope he does this soon so people can get paid before February 1st.
He can hold a vote to reopen the government today and schedule a vote for wall funding for later this week but these need to be separated
Government shutdowns should not be a legislating tactic
The FBI report on what happens after Friday if funding isn’t restored is really sobering

The Federal Courts as well. But this benefits Trump and literally creates lawlessness.