Mr.Guy
formerly timidtebow
- 23,944
- 8,608
Th Dems caved bunch of spineless cowards smh.
***Official Political Discussion Thread***
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by rico x hood,
- Start date
- 64,964
- 196,091
- 26,758
- 38,313
I'm really not sure why Schumer is being slandered. I mentioned earlier this week that hypothetically I would prefer a continuing resolution while negotiations about a long-term solution continue.
It makes the most sense to me. Thanks to McConnell the military would receive no pay during the shutdown so Schumer temporarily solved that problem and is taking care of the troops. He also got long-term funding for CHIP. The polls may suggest republicans take the blame for the shutdown but I don't it's a positive impact for either party. Regardless, the government can still shut down again in 3 weeks. Only thing I would've done differently if possible is shorten the spending bill to 1 week or something to put more pressure on getting a DACA bill passed asap. If McConnell doesn't keep his word, which is probably a safe assumption, the democrats can still say ok we'll just help shut down the government again.
They still have leverage as long as McConnell doesn't invoke the nuclear option. If there's no DACA bill by the end of the spending bill then the shutdown process will just repeat itself.
It makes the most sense to me. Thanks to McConnell the military would receive no pay during the shutdown so Schumer temporarily solved that problem and is taking care of the troops. He also got long-term funding for CHIP. The polls may suggest republicans take the blame for the shutdown but I don't it's a positive impact for either party. Regardless, the government can still shut down again in 3 weeks. Only thing I would've done differently if possible is shorten the spending bill to 1 week or something to put more pressure on getting a DACA bill passed asap. If McConnell doesn't keep his word, which is probably a safe assumption, the democrats can still say ok we'll just help shut down the government again.
They still have leverage as long as McConnell doesn't invoke the nuclear option. If there's no DACA bill by the end of the spending bill then the shutdown process will just repeat itself.
- 26,758
- 38,313
I'm curious to find out how Dapper Don will behave at Davos. Was a bit surprised when he announced he would be attending since it's the polar opposite of what he supposedly stands for.
He'd be in way over his head anyway with all the economics and policy talks.
Also, Sessions was interviewed for several hours last week by the special counsel
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/23/us/politics/jeff-sessions-special-counsel-russia.html
Sessions Is Interviewed in Mueller’s Russia Investigation
He'd be in way over his head anyway with all the economics and policy talks.
Also, Sessions was interviewed for several hours last week by the special counsel
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/23/us/politics/jeff-sessions-special-counsel-russia.html
Sessions Is Interviewed in Mueller’s Russia Investigation
Last edited:
EddieDoyers
formerly eddiengambino
- 46,208
- 23,878
I don’t think DACA is going to happen even if Chuck decided to stall for an extra couple days
Too many hardline conservatives in the House to even make it a consideration
Don’t blame him for trying to get the most out of the Repubs before opening up the government again.
Too many hardline conservatives in the House to even make it a consideration
Don’t blame him for trying to get the most out of the Repubs before opening up the government again.
- 11,997
- 3,286
Schumer made a terrible miscalculation. He thought the shutdown would play better. It didn't, so he was forced to give in due to public perception. He gambled that the dislike for Trump would fly in the face of the clear math that the Democrats forced the government shutdown with the vote. Republicans ensured that CHIP was funded for the long-term. I recall that many on here were concerned about that in the past. It was extended. It also appears that Trump is advocating a DACA agreement. As always, we will see.
- 11,997
- 3,286
Sounds like he kept a campaign promise. Trump has always advocated fair and smart trade.
- 64,964
- 196,091
Let us remember there was a deal. And Trump tanked it. After promising on camera he would not.
If all the Dems voted for it, they won't even need to worry about hardline conservatives.
In theory, there are enough members of Congress that claim to support the DACA protections for it to pass on it's own.
It is Trump that is demanding other **** that is complicating things.
- 26,758
- 38,313
What Trump advocates doesn't really matter though, his position depends on who he last talked to and who is around him.
- 11,997
- 3,286
- 26,758
- 38,313
Or how about his televised negotiation meeting in which he literally stated in these exact words:Let me guess.. a source told CNN that
“I think my positions are going to be what the people in this room come up with,”
He added: “I'm not going to say, 'Oh, gee, I want this,' or 'I want that.' I will be signing it.”
“If they come to me with things I’m not in love with, I’m gonna do it. Because I respect them,” he said.
Those are his words are they not? Or were the WH cameras spreading fake news?
In the same meeting there was also an exchange with Diane Feinstein in which Trump agreed with her on a clean DACA bill but republican senators swiftly stepped in to remind him
Last edited:
- 64,964
- 196,091
No, observable reality did.Let me guess.. a source told CNN that
Take your head out the sand and you will notice it too.
- 64,964
- 196,091
Trump said in front of cameras he would sign any bipartisan deal brought to him.
When the deal was brought to him
He refused to sign it.
Yet Trump defenders want to act like the King Bigot is consistent.
My god, at least put in some effort in your trolling. We deserve better.
When the deal was brought to him
He refused to sign it.
Yet Trump defenders want to act like the King Bigot is consistent.
My god, at least put in some effort in your trolling. We deserve better.
sonoftony
Supporter
- 29,191
- 23,351
- 14,815
- 35,770
Let me guess.. a source told CNN that
Yep. "A source" talked about a bill of love, then talked about ****hole countries. CNN even released a description of said "source": Scottish and German mix with bad hair, a bad attitude, and a penchant for lying.
- 11,997
- 3,286
What bi-partisan deal was brought to him after he stated that for him to sign? That he didn't... Serious question...
It's going to be real interesting to hear this spin
- 26,758
- 38,313
Durbin and Graham...? He explicitly stated he will sign anything whether he likes it or not. So why is there no DACA bill then? What's stopping him? Schumer also offered a deal in a private meeting with the president, which didn't go very well.
He has also stated on several occasions that he wants to take care of DACA as you mentioned before. Feel free to watch the 55 minute negotiation meeting or read a transcript, though the WH ommitted a specific sentence. He's hovering between positions based on who he's talking to and the man himself said his positions are going to be what the people in the room come up with.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...b18ce41436a_story.html?utm_term=.9897aa07bbe4
Excerpt:
“I think my positions are going to be what the people in this room come up with,” Trump said. “I am very much reliant on the people in this room.”
So pliant was Trump that when Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), one of the most liberal members of the chamber, asked if he would support “a clean DACA bill” that protects the dreamers with no other conditions, the president sounded amenable.
“Yeah, I would like to do it,” Trump said.
Trump’s apparent concession so alarmed House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) that he interjected himself, although he was careful only to gently contradict the president, who in the past has referred to him as “my Kevin.”
“Mr. President, you need to be clear, though,” McCarthy said, leaning over from his perch to Trump’s left. “I think what Senator Feinstein is asking here — when we talk about just DACA, we don’t want to be back here two years later. You have to have security.”
Later, again attempting to nudge the president back on track to a more conservative plan, Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.) made a similar pitch for precision. “We have to be very clear, though,” Perdue urged.
McCarthy apparently was not the only one concerned by Trump’s seeming agreement with Feinstein. When the White House released its official transcript Tuesday afternoon, the president’s line — “Yeah, I would like to do it” — was missing.
A White House official said that any omission from the transcript was unintentional and that the context of the conversation was clear.
Last edited:
- 11,997
- 3,286
Again, what was presented for him to sign?
elpablo21
Supporter
- 106,059
- 194,612
Dont think too many "I dont recalls" would please Bobby Three Sticks
- 26,758
- 38,313
I should note that you're arguing a different point now, not the initial point that what Trump advocates has little significance because he hovers between various positions based on who's in the room with him.
Graham and Durbin were also the ones who brought an immigration deal to Trump in the now infamous "****hole countries" meeting. His staff arranged some immigration hardliners to be in the room to the surprise of Graham and Durbin. Graham had this to say after the meeting. It should be noted that Graham has become a staunch supporter of the president in recent months.
https://www.axios.com/graham-trump-...aff-598f1460-28ae-4ad5-b7c5-d2ad3343e381.html
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told reporters Tuesday that he doesn't think the president is being well-served by the White House staff, adding that they "missed the mark" ahead of the immigration meeting in the Oval Office last week:
"Somebody on staff gave him really bad advice ... The President I saw on Tuesday is the guy I play golf with. Something happened ... This has turned into an s-show."
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/22/graham-durbin-immigration-white-house-357359
Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and **** Durbin (D-Ill.) “were completely dishonest” in their negotiations on immigration with President Donald Trump, White House deputy press secretary Hogan Gidley said Monday.
Gidley criticized a bipartisan deal on immigration brought forth by the lawmakers, along with four other senators, for failing to live up to their assurances to the White House.
“Senator Graham and Senator Durbin called the president and told him they had a bipartisan bill,” Gidley said on CNN's "The Lead With Jake Tapper." “They’d come together with some meeting of the minds to prepare a piece of legislation that would address everything the president outlined. The president was ecstatic.”
But he added: “Here’s the problem: Senator Graham and Senator Durbin were completely dishonest.”
Their proposal, Gidley said, “woefully” underfunded the president’s long-sought wall along the southern U.S. border with Mexico and did little to address “chain migration,” an issue the Trump administration has made central to discussions with lawmakers on Capitol Hill.
Gidley also criticized Graham for painting himself as being in lockstep with the White House on immigration, extending a contentious streak of exchanges between the South Carolina lawmaker and the president.
“To pretend he is anything other than someone who wants open borders and amnesty is just disingenuous,” Gidley said.
White House deputy press secretary Raj Shah said earlier Monday that while Trump intended to negotiate with lawmakers over protections for young undocumented immigrants under the DREAM Act, he would not support the Graham-Durbin measure.
“The Graham-Durbin proposal is not a proposal the president can sign,” Shah said.
- 11,997
- 3,286
My point has remained constant. Rusty said he vowed to sign whatever was bi-partisan deal that was brought to him in re: DACA whether he liked it or not. He has not reneged on that. And if he has, please state when. Nothing has been brought to him to sign that he has refused that I am aware of in regards to DACA.
EDIT: Perhaps I am confused. Does the president sign proposals?
- 64,964
- 196,091
As usual, when your *** is caught, you want to argue semantics.
Your argument is Trump didn't veto Durbin-Graham so he didn't flip flop.
Yet you ignore that they didn't bother put the bipartisan bill up for vote because Trump said he was against it and would not sign it.
This is why people call you a damn troll and shade you. Because you can never have a discussion in good faith.
Trump said he would agree to a bipartisan deal on camera, any deal, then in private he rejected it. That is the point.
Even if you want to use the veto to argue semantics. It does not work. So miss us with your struggle deflection
- 26,758
- 38,313
It is not the same point as my initial point though, which is that he wanders between positions frequently, often based on who he's surrounded by and who's talking to him.
What you're arguing is different, you're arguing whether or not he would indeed sign any bipartisan immigration deal as he stated on camera. That is not necessarily related. In fact I wouldn't put any value in him saying he would sign any bipartisan immigration bill even if he disagrees with it, it's just another position he has fluctuated between. After the ****hole meeting, Graham said he wanted the Tuesday president back and blamed Trump's staff for changing his positions.
Graham and Durbin brought him a bill, he strongly railed against it despite those recent comments. If he would sign anything he would've given them the OK to bring it to the floor so he can sign it after it is passed. There's not much point in bringing a bill to the floor that the president already shut down in a meeting. If he would indeed sign anything they come up with, he would have no objections to the Graham and Durbin bill proceeding.
I'm not sure what we're even arguing about at this rate, we're trying to argue a position Trump has taken that he would never adhere to anyway.
- 11,997
- 3,286
Bottom line is that he did not renege on what he said in public. And nothing has been brought for him to sign. Once something is presented for him to sign, and he doesn't, then you are absolutely right. Until then, it is more of the same. I imagine that he will sign the DACA bill that gets presented to him.
- 11,997
- 3,286
They didn't bring him a bill to sign. Period.
