|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On January 19 2018 11:45 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2018 11:32 Aquanim wrote:On January 19 2018 09:31 Introvert wrote:On January 19 2018 09:25 Plansix wrote:
Last I checked Americans citizens overwhelming supported DACA. Trump and the conservatives are not the be trusted to follow through on any clean deal down the line, so this is how the popular program gets put back in place.
Edit: that is what I thought. The GOP has to compromise if they want democrat’s votes. You seem confused, this CR says nothing about DACA either way but the Democrats oppose it. A "clean" deal exactly what the Democrats want. They could fund everything for 3 more weeks while they continue to hash it out, but apparently that's bad. I am amused though how, without fail, no matter the circumstances, year after year, you can always come around to "it's the Republicans who have to give up more." The way I see it there's two possible explanations for this. (1) The Democrats get what they want, but keep wanting more and more (2) The Republicans aren't compromising in the first place I imagine you're trying to imply the first is dominant. Do you have any argument or evidence to convince me or anyody else of that, or is this just an argument in absentia? Are you talking about the last sentence in that post?
Yes. I am assuming (given the "no matter the circumstances" bit) you're expressing the sentiment about compromise on policy in general. It would not surprise me to find that there are specific cases in which each party compromises more than the other. Potentially DACA is one of them. The question is whether as a general rule Democrats keep asking for more even though they've gotten plenty because they're greedy, or whether it's because the Republicans have barely moved.
(edit: I acknowledge the question of what a compromise even is is complicated by internal division in both parties. A large compromise for an extreme wing might be pretty much what the moderate wing wanted in the first place.)
|
On January 19 2018 11:55 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2018 11:45 Introvert wrote:On January 19 2018 11:32 Aquanim wrote:On January 19 2018 09:31 Introvert wrote:On January 19 2018 09:25 Plansix wrote:
Last I checked Americans citizens overwhelming supported DACA. Trump and the conservatives are not the be trusted to follow through on any clean deal down the line, so this is how the popular program gets put back in place.
Edit: that is what I thought. The GOP has to compromise if they want democrat’s votes. You seem confused, this CR says nothing about DACA either way but the Democrats oppose it. A "clean" deal exactly what the Democrats want. They could fund everything for 3 more weeks while they continue to hash it out, but apparently that's bad. I am amused though how, without fail, no matter the circumstances, year after year, you can always come around to "it's the Republicans who have to give up more." The way I see it there's two possible explanations for this. (1) The Democrats get what they want, but keep wanting more and more (2) The Republicans aren't compromising in the first place I imagine you're trying to imply the first is dominant. Do you have any argument or evidence to convince me or anyody else of that, or is this just an argument in absentia? Are you talking about the last sentence in that post? Yes. I am assuming (given the "no matter the circumstances" bit) you're expressing the sentiment about compromise on policy in general. It would not surprise me to find that there are specific cases in which each party compromises more than the other. Potentially DACA is one of them. The question is whether as a general rule Democrats keep asking for more even though they've gotten plenty because they're greedy, or whether it's because the Republicans have barely moved. (edit: I acknowledge the question of what a compromise even is is complicated by internal division in both parties. A large compromise for an extreme wing might be pretty much what the moderate wing wanted in the first place.)
That argument is a little more involved although I contend that the former is a believable position given the way GOP leaders react to dead ends compared to Dem leaders.
But in this case I was referring specifically to Plansix and his posting history.
|
On January 19 2018 12:07 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2018 11:55 Aquanim wrote:On January 19 2018 11:45 Introvert wrote:On January 19 2018 11:32 Aquanim wrote:On January 19 2018 09:31 Introvert wrote:On January 19 2018 09:25 Plansix wrote:
Last I checked Americans citizens overwhelming supported DACA. Trump and the conservatives are not the be trusted to follow through on any clean deal down the line, so this is how the popular program gets put back in place.
Edit: that is what I thought. The GOP has to compromise if they want democrat’s votes. You seem confused, this CR says nothing about DACA either way but the Democrats oppose it. A "clean" deal exactly what the Democrats want. They could fund everything for 3 more weeks while they continue to hash it out, but apparently that's bad. I am amused though how, without fail, no matter the circumstances, year after year, you can always come around to "it's the Republicans who have to give up more." The way I see it there's two possible explanations for this. (1) The Democrats get what they want, but keep wanting more and more (2) The Republicans aren't compromising in the first place I imagine you're trying to imply the first is dominant. Do you have any argument or evidence to convince me or anyody else of that, or is this just an argument in absentia? Are you talking about the last sentence in that post? Yes. I am assuming (given the "no matter the circumstances" bit) you're expressing the sentiment about compromise on policy in general. It would not surprise me to find that there are specific cases in which each party compromises more than the other. Potentially DACA is one of them. The question is whether as a general rule Democrats keep asking for more even though they've gotten plenty because they're greedy, or whether it's because the Republicans have barely moved. (edit: I acknowledge the question of what a compromise even is is complicated by internal division in both parties. A large compromise for an extreme wing might be pretty much what the moderate wing wanted in the first place.) That argument is a little more involved although I contend that the former is a believable position given the way GOP leaders react to dead ends compared to Dem leaders. But in this case I was referring specifically to Plansix and his posting history.
Well sure, but that sentiment about p6's posting history is only amusing if you agree with the underlying assumption that the Republicans have already given up a disproptionate amount.
If on the other hand you walk in with the assumption that the Republicans have given up very little and therefore continuing to point out that they need to compromise more is a reasonable position, it's not amusing at all.
Since I guarantee that neither assumption is generally accepted in this thread I thought the situation should be clarified if possible.
Arguing from contradictory assumptions is a complete waste of time.
|
So the GOP purposefully withheld CHIP funding to use it as a bargaining tool for now, and now they're whining that Democrats aren't falling head over heals because Republicans had the "decency" to actually start funding it again.
That is such a sick game. CHIP should already have been funded -- end of story. Only one party here is playing "games" with Children's Health Insurance. And, yes, it is the majority party, which could have funded it months ago, but wanted to "use" it instead. I'm glad the Democrats are ignoring that strategy. Republicans whining about obstruction is about as hollow a complaint as can be.
edit: and you all are ignoring the important fact that they can't pass anything with any certainty regardless of votes. Because the idiot that signs the bills into laws has made it perfectly not-clear what it is he will sign or veto.
At this point, you could remove the Dems entirely, make it a 50-vote requirement, not a 60-vote requirement, only needs Republican votes -- it would still lose. Because even their own party doesn't know what it's doing or what it wants.
But the GOP withheld CHIP for half a year, what an accomplishment, so let's blame the Democrats for not slavishly agreeing to anything these hostage-takers of children's health demand. Surrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrre.
|
On January 19 2018 13:08 Leporello wrote:
So the GOP purposefully withheld CHIP funding to use it as a bargaining tool for now, and now they're whining that Democrats aren't falling head over heals because Republicans had the "decency" to actually start funding it again.
That is such a sick game. CHIP should already have been funded -- end of story. Only one party here is playing "games" with Children's Health Insurance. And, yes, it is the majority party, which could have funded it months ago, but wanted to "use" it instead. I'm glad the Democrats are ignoring that strategy. Republicans whining about obstruction is about as hollow a complaint as can be.
edit: and you all are ignoring the important fact that they can't pass anything with any certainty regardless of votes. Because the idiot that signs the bills into laws has made it perfectly not-clear what it is he will sign or veto.
At this point, you could remove the Dems entirely, make it a 50-vote requirement and a 60-vote requirement, only needs Republican votes -- it would still lose. Because even their own party doesn't know what it's doing or what it wants.
But the GOP withheld CHIP for half a year, what an accomplishment, so let's blame the Democrats for not slavishly agreeing to anything these hostage-takers of children's health demand. Surrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrre.
They wanted to fund it before but they and the Democrats disagreed on how. Since no state was actually going to run out of funds before this deadline it was pushed back. It wasn't "withheld" for use now.
|
On January 19 2018 13:15 Introvert wrote:
They wanted to fund it before but they and the Democrats disagreed on how.
Nyet. They have never proposed a clean CHIP bill. Where are you reading that fantasy?
Attaching CHIP to a repeal of Obamacare is not a clean CHIP bill. It's another hostage tactic. Stop making things up, please, and thank you.
|
On January 19 2018 13:17 Leporello wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2018 13:15 Introvert wrote:
They wanted to fund it before but they and the Democrats disagreed on how. Nyet. They have never proposed a clean CHIP bill. Where are you reading that fantasy? Attaching CHIP to a repeal of Obamacare is not a clean CHIP bill. It's another hostage tactic. Stop making things up, please, and thank you.
I didn't say "stand alone." The GOP has sent a few individual appropriations bills forward that are waiting for the Senate right now.
They already passed temp funding in December.
Congress is injecting nearly $3 billion into the Children's Health Insurance Program to keep it funded through March. The money is included in a short-term spending bill to keep the federal government open.
Though CHIP is popular on both sides of the political aisle, its funding ended on Sept. 30, and Congress has failed to reauthorize a long-term appropriation for it. States had started warning that children would lose their coverage if lawmakers didn't act fast.
Parents have been pleading with Congress to keep their children insured. Even Jimmy Kimmel urged Americans to tell their representatives to fund the program.
The federal government was set to shut down Friday as Republicans grappled with how to fund it before the end of the year. The GOP passed another short-term solution Thursday that will get them through the middle of January.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/21/news/economy/chip-funding/index.html
And that last line:
While both Republicans and Democrats said they support fully funding CHIP, they differed in how to pay for it.
Long story short, it hasn't been held "hostage." If you think it has then you absolutely MUST believe that the Democrats are holding military funding "hostage" but I suspect you don't.
|
Right, because instead of a simple bill supporting CHIP, Republicans want to use it as a bargaining tool. The Democrats are right to simply refuse that game.
"They differ in how to pay for it."
It seems we're back to civics. "How to pay for it" means how they pass the legislation. You're just repeating what I'm saying in milktoast-fashion. Republicans want to "pay" for CHIP by attaching it to other legislation that has nothing to do with CHIP. In other words, they're using it as a hostage.
If Republicans wanted to fund CHIP, it would be the easiest thing in the world. It'd be done. Easy as can be. Simple. A clean bill would pass with, like, 90+ votes.
|
On January 19 2018 13:29 Leporello wrote:
Right, because instead of a simple bill supporting CHIP, Republicans want to use it as a bargaining tool. The Democrats are right to simply refuse that game.
"They differ in how to pay for it."
It seems we're back to civics. "How to pay for it" means how they pass the legislation. You're just repeating what I'm saying in milktoast-fashion. Republicans want to "pay" for CHIP by attaching it to other legislation that has nothing to do with CHIP. In other words, they're using it as a hostage.
If Republicans wanted to fund CHIP, it would be the easiest thing in the world. It'd be done. Easy as can be. Simple. A clean bill would pass with, like, 90+ votes.
That's actually not the disagreement they were having over funding (they were talking about actual revenue sources) but I'll just quote you: stop making things up, please, and thank you. But I know, I know, everything is simple in your world, as I look back at your name and realize who I'm talking to.
I'll leave with this that still has many relevant parts from way back when Jimmy Kimmel was getting talking points from the Democrats.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/12/13/fact-checking-jimmy-kimmel-on-chip-funding/?utm_term=.8ba896b7a20b
|
[B]On January 19 2018 13:20 Introvert wrote:
Long story short, it hasn't been held "hostage." If you think it has then you absolutely MUST believe that the Democrats are holding military funding "hostage" but I suspect you don't.
This proves how much you're twisting things and missing the point.
There is no clean military spending bill. It doesn't work that way.
And I think you know that. I think you know you're just sort of lying. A clean CHIP bill would pass easily, and the ONLY reason it hasn't been created that YOU can give, no matter how you try to state it, is because Republicans want to use it in other legislation. Because to them, Children's Health is NOT bi-partisan. It is a tool to use against the libs.
|
On January 19 2018 13:17 Leporello wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2018 13:15 Introvert wrote:
They wanted to fund it before but they and the Democrats disagreed on how. Nyet. They have never proposed a clean CHIP bill. Where are you reading that fantasy? Attaching CHIP to a repeal of Obamacare is not a clean CHIP bill. It's another hostage tactic. Stop making things up, please, and thank you.
What kind of twisted logic is this? The GOP controls both chambers and the presidency, and has enough votes to pass anything they want. They were voted in fair and square. Literally the only reason Democrats are even at the negotiating table is because they're holding the government hostage with the threat of a filibuster.
There is absolutely no consistent position you can hold to denounce the 2013 shutdown and defend the threat of one in 2017 by the Democrats. All of you are losing any credibility you had left if you don't denounce this nonsense.
|
On January 19 2018 13:33 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2018 13:17 Leporello wrote:On January 19 2018 13:15 Introvert wrote:
They wanted to fund it before but they and the Democrats disagreed on how. Nyet. They have never proposed a clean CHIP bill. Where are you reading that fantasy? Attaching CHIP to a repeal of Obamacare is not a clean CHIP bill. It's another hostage tactic. Stop making things up, please, and thank you. What kind of twisted logic is this? The GOP controls both chambers and the presidency, and has enough votes to pass anything they want. They were voted in fair and square. Literally the only reason Democrats are even at the negotiating table is because they're holding the government hostage with the threat of a filibuster. There is absolutely no consistent position you can hold to denounce the 2013 shutdown and defend the threat of one in 2017 by the Democrats. All of you are losing any credibility you had left if you don't denounce this nonsense.
The Republicans have 51 Senators. They don't have 50 votes right now. Democrats, at this point, have nothing to do with it.
My disgust with CHIP being used like a bargaining tool aside, regardless of that, the GOP is failing to do this even amongst themselves.
But, sure dude. Really, at this stage, the Republicans are blaming the libs for their own inability to even propose legislation. But, obviously, they just don't know what to propose. Partly because they're dealing with a President who gives them schizophrenic orders on what he wants, changing day to day.
Democrats are going to celebrate and politicize the gov't shutdown. And they should. Republicans want to keep playing these games claiming they're "bipartisan" when it comes to things like CHIP, while they actively treat CHIP as something to be bargained for. SO CLEVER. If they can't pass such a simple, helpful, life-saving piece of legislation without trying to stick it to the libs, then screw it. Republicans want to make gov't worthless, well, they succeeded.
|
On January 19 2018 13:35 Leporello wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2018 13:33 mozoku wrote:On January 19 2018 13:17 Leporello wrote:On January 19 2018 13:15 Introvert wrote:
They wanted to fund it before but they and the Democrats disagreed on how. Nyet. They have never proposed a clean CHIP bill. Where are you reading that fantasy? Attaching CHIP to a repeal of Obamacare is not a clean CHIP bill. It's another hostage tactic. Stop making things up, please, and thank you. What kind of twisted logic is this? The GOP controls both chambers and the presidency, and has enough votes to pass anything they want. They were voted in fair and square. Literally the only reason Democrats are even at the negotiating table is because they're holding the government hostage with the threat of a filibuster. There is absolutely no consistent position you can hold to denounce the 2013 shutdown and defend the threat of one in 2017 by the Democrats. All of you are losing any credibility you had left if you don't denounce this nonsense. The Republicans have 51 Senators. They don't have 50 votes right now. Democrats, at this point, have nothing to do with it. My disgust with CHIP being used like a bargaining tool aside, regardless of that, the GOP is failing to do this even amongst themselves. But, sure dude.
On January 19 2018 08:53 Introvert wrote:
Earlier tweet, but I like the honesty here:
I expect you'll change your mind now that the facts no longer support your position, yes?
EDIT: After a bit more research, I'll clarify. The CR bill is a short-term measure which requires a simple majority vote. Republicans have the votes for that, but Dems are threatening to filibuster it. Regardless, nobody wants a CR bill; they want long-term funding. That requires 60 votes, which would require Democratic votes regardless of whether the GOP's two dissenting senators (for that proposal) are on board.
No matter what bill you're discussing though, it's the Democrats attempting to use a shutdown as leverage to push through a legislative agenda that they failed to obtain the votes through elections to enact via standard procedures. There's really no way around it.
And I say this as someone who was against the 2013 shutdown and is a strong supporter of DACA. The recurrence of the "hold the government hostage" play is just bad for the country, no matter which party is doing it. You can't simultaneously denounce the tactic when the other party does it, and support it when your party does it.
|
On January 19 2018 13:45 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2018 13:35 Leporello wrote:On January 19 2018 13:33 mozoku wrote:On January 19 2018 13:17 Leporello wrote:On January 19 2018 13:15 Introvert wrote:
They wanted to fund it before but they and the Democrats disagreed on how. Nyet. They have never proposed a clean CHIP bill. Where are you reading that fantasy? Attaching CHIP to a repeal of Obamacare is not a clean CHIP bill. It's another hostage tactic. Stop making things up, please, and thank you. What kind of twisted logic is this? The GOP controls both chambers and the presidency, and has enough votes to pass anything they want. They were voted in fair and square. Literally the only reason Democrats are even at the negotiating table is because they're holding the government hostage with the threat of a filibuster. There is absolutely no consistent position you can hold to denounce the 2013 shutdown and defend the threat of one in 2017 by the Democrats. All of you are losing any credibility you had left if you don't denounce this nonsense. The Republicans have 51 Senators. They don't have 50 votes right now. Democrats, at this point, have nothing to do with it. My disgust with CHIP being used like a bargaining tool aside, regardless of that, the GOP is failing to do this even amongst themselves. But, sure dude. I expect you'll change your mind now that the facts no longer support your position, yes?
If this is true, then they would prove it by putting it to vote. They could absolutely put the government shutdown on the Dems this way. I'm not sure it will have the political fallout you desire, and we'll see if it happens.
Thus far, what you're saying is "we would pass a theoretical bill, but the Dems won't vote for it, ergo, it's their fault" This is coming from the party that tried to repeal Obamacare literally hundreds of times. They have no qualms proposing frivolous legislation.
|
|
|
On January 19 2018 13:45 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2018 13:35 Leporello wrote:On January 19 2018 13:33 mozoku wrote:On January 19 2018 13:17 Leporello wrote:On January 19 2018 13:15 Introvert wrote:
They wanted to fund it before but they and the Democrats disagreed on how. Nyet. They have never proposed a clean CHIP bill. Where are you reading that fantasy? Attaching CHIP to a repeal of Obamacare is not a clean CHIP bill. It's another hostage tactic. Stop making things up, please, and thank you. What kind of twisted logic is this? The GOP controls both chambers and the presidency, and has enough votes to pass anything they want. They were voted in fair and square. Literally the only reason Democrats are even at the negotiating table is because they're holding the government hostage with the threat of a filibuster. There is absolutely no consistent position you can hold to denounce the 2013 shutdown and defend the threat of one in 2017 by the Democrats. All of you are losing any credibility you had left if you don't denounce this nonsense. The Republicans have 51 Senators. They don't have 50 votes right now. Democrats, at this point, have nothing to do with it. My disgust with CHIP being used like a bargaining tool aside, regardless of that, the GOP is failing to do this even amongst themselves. But, sure dude. I expect you'll change your mind now that the facts no longer support your position, yes? EDIT: After a bit more research, I'll clarify. The CR bill is a short-term measure which requires a simple majority vote. Republicans have the votes for that, but Dems are threatening to filibuster it. Regardless, nobody wants a CR bill; they want long-term funding. That requires 60 votes, which would require Democratic votes regardless of whether the GOP's two dissenting senators (for that proposal) are on board. No matter what bill you're discussing though, it's the Democrats attempting to use a shutdown as leverage to push through a legislative agenda that they failed to obtain the votes to enact through elections. There's really no way around it. And I say this as someone who was against the 2013 shutdown and is a strong supporter of DACA. The recurrence of the "hold the government hostage" play is just bad for the country, no matter which party is doing it. You can't simultaneously denounce the tactic when the other party does it, and support it when your party does it.
Both essentially require 60 votes if they’re individual spending bills. Any single senator of the Democrat’s 49 can filibuster and push it to 60 to end it and pass bill.
The freedom caucus et al want more time to negotiate a spending bill closer to their priorities (such as increased defense spending), so funding the government while they haggle on where the compromise lies is a high priority.
|
On January 19 2018 13:45 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2018 13:35 Leporello wrote:On January 19 2018 13:33 mozoku wrote:On January 19 2018 13:17 Leporello wrote:On January 19 2018 13:15 Introvert wrote:
They wanted to fund it before but they and the Democrats disagreed on how. Nyet. They have never proposed a clean CHIP bill. Where are you reading that fantasy? Attaching CHIP to a repeal of Obamacare is not a clean CHIP bill. It's another hostage tactic. Stop making things up, please, and thank you. What kind of twisted logic is this? The GOP controls both chambers and the presidency, and has enough votes to pass anything they want. They were voted in fair and square. Literally the only reason Democrats are even at the negotiating table is because they're holding the government hostage with the threat of a filibuster. There is absolutely no consistent position you can hold to denounce the 2013 shutdown and defend the threat of one in 2017 by the Democrats. All of you are losing any credibility you had left if you don't denounce this nonsense. The Republicans have 51 Senators. They don't have 50 votes right now. Democrats, at this point, have nothing to do with it. My disgust with CHIP being used like a bargaining tool aside, regardless of that, the GOP is failing to do this even amongst themselves. But, sure dude. I expect you'll change your mind now that the facts no longer support your position, yes? EDIT: After a bit more research, I'll clarify. The CR bill is a short-term measure which requires a simple majority vote. Republicans have the votes for that, but Dems are threatening to filibuster it. Regardless, nobody wants a CR bill; they want long-term funding. That requires 60 votes, which would require Democratic votes regardless of whether the GOP's two dissenting senators (for that proposal) are on board. No matter what bill you're discussing though, it's the Democrats attempting to use a shutdown as leverage to push through a legislative agenda that they failed to obtain the votes through elections to enact via standard procedures. There's really no way around it. And I say this as someone who was against the 2013 shutdown and is a strong supporter of DACA. The recurrence of the "hold the government hostage" play is just bad for the country, no matter which party is doing it. You can't simultaneously denounce the tactic when the other party does it, and support it when your party does it.
"Hey we negotiated this entire deal without you in the room with pretty much nothing you care about and only things we care about. Why aren't you voting for it and holding the government hostage?"
|
This is a guy who says/tweets 14 hours ago that the working class needs to restore America's prosperity and destiny. Charges 100k for a photo and dinner with him in the same area.
|
On January 19 2018 13:33 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2018 13:17 Leporello wrote:On January 19 2018 13:15 Introvert wrote:
They wanted to fund it before but they and the Democrats disagreed on how. Nyet. They have never proposed a clean CHIP bill. Where are you reading that fantasy? Attaching CHIP to a repeal of Obamacare is not a clean CHIP bill. It's another hostage tactic. Stop making things up, please, and thank you. What kind of twisted logic is this? The GOP controls both chambers and the presidency, and has enough votes to pass anything they want. They were voted in fair and square. Literally the only reason Democrats are even at the negotiating table is because they're holding the government hostage with the threat of a filibuster. There is absolutely no consistent position you can hold to denounce the 2013 shutdown and defend the threat of one in 2017 by the Democrats. All of you are losing any credibility you had left if you don't denounce this nonsense.
if they could pass anything they wanted, and overwhelmingly support CHIP and DACA, why haven’t they? (because they don’t want it. if they did it’d be passed, like you said. leading us to...)
and what twisted logic are you using to blame the dems for shut down for holding out on DACA when the republicans allegedly overwhelmingly support DACA, but won’t vote for a funding bill with the necessary DACA legislation?
these are two contradictory beliefs. either the congressional GOP are full of shit and don’t want DACA (it’s this one,) or you simply can’t blame the dems for the shutdown.
until everyone concedes that the congressional GOP are airbags full of shit we get to pretend it’s not the dems holding up the vote, because you simply cannot hold both positions without being a hypocrite.
personally i’m far more comfortable with a shut down bargaining chip than i am using DACA or CHIP as bargaining chips, so this all works for me. one could argue that the Dems are using DACA as a bargaining chip, but it can only be a bargaining chip if the other side doesn’t want it. else what’s to bargain? it’s a win win for the dems. the only way one can conclude they’re obstructionists is to also accept the GOP has been lying through their teeth and don’t want DACA. either everyone comes out with a win or everyone loses but the GOP is exposed for the frauds they are.
|
On January 19 2018 20:18 brian wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2018 13:33 mozoku wrote:On January 19 2018 13:17 Leporello wrote:On January 19 2018 13:15 Introvert wrote:
They wanted to fund it before but they and the Democrats disagreed on how. Nyet. They have never proposed a clean CHIP bill. Where are you reading that fantasy? Attaching CHIP to a repeal of Obamacare is not a clean CHIP bill. It's another hostage tactic. Stop making things up, please, and thank you. What kind of twisted logic is this? The GOP controls both chambers and the presidency, and has enough votes to pass anything they want. They were voted in fair and square. Literally the only reason Democrats are even at the negotiating table is because they're holding the government hostage with the threat of a filibuster. There is absolutely no consistent position you can hold to denounce the 2013 shutdown and defend the threat of one in 2017 by the Democrats. All of you are losing any credibility you had left if you don't denounce this nonsense. if they could pass anything they wanted, and overwhelmingly support CHIP and DACA, why haven’t they? and what twisted logic are you using to blame the dems for shut down for holding out on DACA when the republicans allegedly overwhelmingly support DACA, but won’t vote for a CR with the necessary DACA legislation? these are two contradictory beliefs. either the congressional GOP are full of shit and don’t want DACA (it’s this one,) or you simply can’t blame the dems for the shutdown. but until everyone concedes that the congressional GOP are airbags full of shit we get to pretend it’s not the dems holding up the vote.
I would like to believe some GOP members are actually in favor of the DACA. However the moment they agree to it the tea party walks away and they risk getting primaried.
Its important to realize the GOP is very much an unstable 2 party coalition at this point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
