Why block snap benefits?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe you absolute morons are arguing about who “should” and “should not” receive SNAP while the billionaires are picking your pockets. Fools, all of you.

It’s because they run into the snap recipient on a regular basis.

The billionaire at best is a mythical creature that can give them money.

US born citizens are entitled to SNAP and should get it.

Not expecting both immigrants and billionaires to not rely on middle class to fund their lifestyles is reasonable.

Worrying about the scraps the poor (US citizens or otherwise) receive marks you for a fool. The rich and powerful are selling this country down the river, destroying the environment, and ruining your kids’ and grandkids’ futures RIGHT NOW.

For the love of God, pull your head out of your @$$.

Worrying about what a random person on the Internet prioritizes in politics marks you for a fool. I dont want either group taking advantage of the middle class taxpayers. IDGAF what you think I should care about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most of the adults on stamps are overweight or obese and probably need to starve to get a little healthier if we are being honest. Of course this excludes the babies, children, and elderly

Is “honest” what we’re now calling ignorance? Being food insecure in America also correlates with eating cheaper, processed foods. Some may “starve”. Others who are obese, or who have hypertension, or who have diabetes, will likely become sicker — either from eating poorer diets or from not eating at all. Yes, this is a crisis the Republicans are deliberately creating— just as they’re trying to force the Democrats to give up their push for extending healthcare benefits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Louder for people in the back:

Trump is ACTIVELY trying to block SNAP in the courts. And Republicans have been trying to kill SNAP for the last couple of decades.

Stop blaming it on Democrats.

And now he’s ordering states to not step in with their own payments.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I no longer understand anything that is happening. I used to think I had figured some of it out and knew some of the whys and hows -even if I disagreed - I could still figure out motives and reasoning.

None of this makes sense to me.

This doesn’t make sense because our government has reached a severe point of dysfunction. If this was a parliamentary system they would be calling a new election right now. It’s really bad.

And Trump would be booted out.

OUR only option is impeachment.

And the puppets the Republicans put in office won’t do their jobs (of honoring the Constitution). They literally have not reported to work for 8 weeks—though they are collecting paychecks.

The Democrats stand ready to negotiate. The Republicans won’t even show up in DC.

What’s there to negotiate?

Pay attention.
Schumer just made an offer to the Republicans.

Thune called it a nonstarter. Johnson won’t even let his caucus come to work.

That is one side trying to negotiate and the other stonewalling.

The House passed a bill to reopen the government. The Republican majority in the Senate is likewise happy to reopen the government.

It is the Democrat minority in the Senate that is blocking funding to the entire government because they want to demand changes they don’t have the votes for. What they are doing is fundamentally undemocratic.

If the majorities of the House and Senate give in to this type of tactic will the minority party shut down the entire government every time they want something they don’t have the votes for?

It seems the Republicans also don't have the votes for what they want. Why is your position that democrats must capitulate and not Republicans? Or better yet, compromise? Why is it undemocratic for Democrats to vote in a way that reflects the citizens that voted them in?

Because Democrats are keeping the government closed for reasons unrelated to the FY26 budget process. The Republicans voted 13 times to keep the government open during Biden’s term. Democrats have an amazing capacity to conflate issues.

Fundamentally untrue. Had the Democrats played any part in the FY 26 budget process, there would be a very strong reason for them to support a CR. They would have prioritized keeping ACA it in some fashion. Instead, the Republicans pushed it through, with only Republican support, and they now reap what they’ve sown.

But the Senate Democrats could support the CR and still oppose the underlying FY26 bills. Thats how we know this is not about the appropriations process. It’s about Leader Schumers reelection process. Federal workers in MD and VA should be apoplectic with Kaine, Warner, Van Hollen, and Alsobrooks for putting us through this trauma. Reopen the government tomorrow. Then have a separate vote on ACA subsidies and let it win or lose on its own merits.

Make that make sense. Support the CR—which is the execution of the FY 26 Republican-only budget— and then “oppose FY 26”. This is opposing FY 26. If Republicans wanted their support, they had all the time in the world to get it.

The CR would be a continuation of the FY24 budget that Democrats have already voted in favor 15 times. So, no.

Yeah? I seem to remember in 2024...we had a budget for some agency… USAID? This CR restores USAID funding?

Yes, it would.

And then it becomes your boys slush fund to send to Argentina. Nope. Republicans broke this process beginning with DOGE. They have no reasonable expectation that anyone should support the way their governing.

You might be right. But that’s for the courts to decide. Not Rep. Ocasio-Cortez to decide.

Trump ignores the courts. We've all been watching this destructive game for 10 months. So you're saying that the Democrats should simply rubberstamp Trump's plans to loot the country for his own ends?

I’m saying the Democrats should reopen the government. Then hold a separate vote on the unrelated ACS subsidies.

Has Thune and Johnson committed to that?

No, they haven't. And even if they did, how can anyone trust them?

This is what DH and I were just discussing. Republican politicians have zero credibility right now because they are so obviously in thrall to Trump. This is not the good ol' days when politicians had mostly amicable relationships across the aisle and could actually work out compromises.

If that were true they would have gotten rid of the filibuster weeks ago.

Ultimately, the Republicans benefit more than the Democrats from the filibuster, because they benefit from less-populated states. It would only take 51 votes in the Senate and a democrat in the Oval Office to realize DC statehood in a post filibuster universe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Louder for people in the back:

Trump is ACTIVELY trying to block SNAP in the courts. And Republicans have been trying to kill SNAP for the last couple of decades.

Stop blaming it on Democrats.

And now he’s ordering states to not step in with their own payments.

Aren't we supposed to be for local control where possible? Why is the federal government telling states they can't use their own money to take care of the people from whom it came?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Louder for people in the back:

Trump is ACTIVELY trying to block SNAP in the courts. And Republicans have been trying to kill SNAP for the last couple of decades.

Stop blaming it on Democrats.

And now he’s ordering states to not step in with their own payments.

Yup. Make it make sense.

Trump Demands States ‘Undo’ Sending Full Food Stamps
“The Trump administration told states that they must ‘immediately undo’ any actions to provide full food stamp benefits to low-income families, in a move that added to the chaos and uncertainty surrounding the nation’s largest anti-hunger program during the government shutdown,” the New York Times reports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Democrats are blocking SNAP benefits.

Minority view

Among SNAP recipients? Are you sure?

'

The majority view is that the shutdown is the President's fault.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Louder for people in the back:

Trump is ACTIVELY trying to block SNAP in the courts. And Republicans have been trying to kill SNAP for the last couple of decades.

Stop blaming it on Democrats.

And now he’s ordering states to not step in with their own payments.

Here's hoping that Wisconsin, Kansas, and Pennsylvania SNAP recipients get theirs pulled back. They voted for this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dems blocked military pay. But are demanding SNAP gets paid out.

Ok, and?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dems blocked military pay. But are demanding SNAP gets paid out.

The democrats have nothing to with the Trump-Epstein shutdown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NYT reporting Trump administration demanding states undo work already done to issue food stamps.

For an administration blaming Democrats, Trump sure is working ridiculously hard not to feed people despite court order after court order.

This is the president my Christian brothers and sisters voted for. Would Jesus deny SNAP benefits to hungry people?

[Anonymous]

Here are some more details about the White House’s demand that states only pay partial SNAP benefits.

“A memo from the Agriculture Department’s Food and Nutrition Service directs states to “immediately undo any steps taken to issue” full payments to recipients of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

Instead, the White House is asking states to issue only partial payments — which are about 65 percent of a usual SNAP payment.
The memo warns states that if they do not comply with the orders, they will face consequences, including the cancellation of federal funding that states need to cover some of SNAP’s administrative costs.

The federal government pays for all SNAP benefits, but states administer the program to its residents. States and the federal government share administrative costs.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/11/09/snap-benefits-states-usda-trump/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Louder for people in the back:

Trump is ACTIVELY trying to block SNAP in the courts. And Republicans have been trying to kill SNAP for the last couple of decades.

Stop blaming it on Democrats.

And now he’s ordering states to not step in with their own payments.

Aren't we supposed to be for local control where possible? Why is the federal government telling states they can't use their own money to take care of the people from whom it came?

Exactly. States’ rights, right? If the federal government is in shambles, then the individual states can step up and help their citizens. Right? I guess? Maybe?

I dunno.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe you absolute morons are arguing about who “should” and “should not” receive SNAP while the billionaires are picking your pockets. Fools, all of you.

It’s because they run into the snap recipient on a regular basis.

The billionaire at best is a mythical creature that can give them money.

US born citizens are entitled to SNAP and should get it.

Not expecting both immigrants and billionaires to not rely on middle class to fund their lifestyles is reasonable.

Worrying about the scraps the poor (US citizens or otherwise) receive marks you for a fool. The rich and powerful are selling this country down the river, destroying the environment, and ruining your kids’ and grandkids’ futures RIGHT NOW.

For the love of God, pull your head out of your @$$.

Worrying about what a random person on the Internet prioritizes in politics marks you for a fool. I dont want either group taking advantage of the middle class taxpayers. IDGAF what you think I should care about.

Typical. Rather than engage in some introspection and face the humiliation of having been hoodwinked, you prefer to double down on your (obviously) incorrect position.

This is exactly how we ended up with Trump 2.0. People like you are too emotionally fragile and insecure to ever admit (even to yourself) that you were wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe you absolute morons are arguing about who “should” and “should not” receive SNAP while the billionaires are picking your pockets. Fools, all of you.

It’s because they run into the snap recipient on a regular basis.

The billionaire at best is a mythical creature that can give them money.

US born citizens are entitled to SNAP and should get it.

Not expecting both immigrants and billionaires to not rely on middle class to fund their lifestyles is reasonable.

Worrying about the scraps the poor (US citizens or otherwise) receive marks you for a fool. The rich and powerful are selling this country down the river, destroying the environment, and ruining your kids’ and grandkids’ futures RIGHT NOW.

For the love of God, pull your head out of your @$$.

Worrying about what a random person on the Internet prioritizes in politics marks you for a fool. I dont want either group taking advantage of the middle class taxpayers. IDGAF what you think I should care about.

Typical. Rather than engage in some introspection and face the humiliation of having been hoodwinked, you prefer to double down on your (obviously) incorrect position.

This is exactly how we ended up with Trump 2.0. People like you are too emotionally fragile and insecure to ever admit (even to yourself) that you were wrong.

People can engage in introspection and still come to a different conclusion than you. You are not right simply because you believe it so. Perhaps Democrats lost because of their arrogance similar to what you are displaying here. You need some introspection about that.