|
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 20 2018 02:49 Mohdoo wrote:
It's hard not to wonder if democrat obstruction would work out as well as it did for republicans. Radicalizing your base is really politically helpful as we have seen.
apparently bad governance is good for elections, which is super twisted.
|
On January 20 2018 02:55 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 02:49 Mohdoo wrote:
It's hard not to wonder if democrat obstruction would work out as well as it did for republicans. Radicalizing your base is really politically helpful as we have seen. apparently bad governance is good for elections, which is super twisted.
yeah, it is; not surprising thoug hwhen an anti-government agenda is pushed.
|
On January 20 2018 02:55 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 02:49 Mohdoo wrote:
It's hard not to wonder if democrat obstruction would work out as well as it did for republicans. Radicalizing your base is really politically helpful as we have seen. apparently bad governance is good for elections, which is super twisted.
Bad is a result, but the key is "principled". People want to feel empowered and they use the politicians to convince themselves that they are more powerful as individuals. When people see someone being as obnoxious as they are, they feel connected with that person and they fight for that person.
The problem is the fact that the average person is just not that great and we don't want government to reflect the average person.
|
|
|
On January 20 2018 02:55 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 02:49 Mohdoo wrote:
It's hard not to wonder if democrat obstruction would work out as well as it did for republicans. Radicalizing your base is really politically helpful as we have seen. apparently bad governance is good for elections, which is super twisted.
Andrew Jackson is the prime example of this in our history. And also the person the founding fathers feared in power and designed out government to keep in check. The problem is that we haven’t had to do it in like 50 years(maybe that isn’t a problem, TBH).
On January 20 2018 03:22 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 02:55 ticklishmusic wrote:On January 20 2018 02:49 Mohdoo wrote:
It's hard not to wonder if democrat obstruction would work out as well as it did for republicans. Radicalizing your base is really politically helpful as we have seen. apparently bad governance is good for elections, which is super twisted. Bad is a result, but the key is "principled". People want to feel empowered and they use the politicians to convince themselves that they are more powerful as individuals. When people see someone being as obnoxious as they are, they feel connected with that person and they fight for that person. The problem is the fact that the average person is just not that great and we don't want government to reflect the average person.
I sort of disagree. I think the American citizen would love be challenged. To work towards a goal and find a collective, national future. You look at WW2 and after, we were less educated and informed about government. But collectively we turned our entire country towards a single goal. And after we built the entire countries infrastructure. When 9/11 happened, the entire nation was on board. People were ready to help. Obama got elected on the back of a promising hope and a version of the future where we did great things together.
But you need leadership to back that up across all three branches. 9/11 was bugled by the Bush administration and an over trusting congress of Democrat unwilling to challenge Republicans. People forget that Bush was pretty unpopular with both voting blocks before 9/11 hit. Obama was undercut by less than great leadership choices and a push for the hardest and most controversial issue they could tackle(maybe immigration might have been worse). And in the absence of that leadership, we get this.
|
On January 20 2018 02:01 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 01:23 Danglars wrote:On January 20 2018 01:00 Introvert wrote:
I see where the Democrat talking points are going. Dems refusing to fund anything in their defense of non-citizens after calling 2013 Republicans arsonists, anarchists, and legislative terrorists. But we're all going to hang our hat on the last second CHIP 6 year funding carrot. Humorous breakdown: As we consider yet another possible government shutdown, it’s important that we review the ground rules for how to approach the central issue that arises each time we face this calamity—namely, who is to blame for it.
If Republicans control both the White House and Congress, then the shutdown is their fault. That’s because Republicans were unwilling to negotiate with a Democratic minority that offered sensible, mature, and apolitical ideas for improving the spending bill.
The GOP must be reminded that in our system, holding a bare majority is not enough. The 60-vote supermajority threshold required to pass legislation in the Senate forces both sides to find common ground. The GOP should have worked harder to win votes from moderate Democratic senators to clear this procedural hurdle, which protects the vital interests of the congressional minority.
If Democrats control both the White House and Congress, then a shutdown must be the result of a small number of Republican senators filibustering the spending bill in reckless disregard for the urgency of funding the government. These senators are subverting the will of the duly elected majority, playing politics with our national security, and harming millions of hard-working civil servants and their families. The situation is a textbook illustration of how the anachronistic Senate rules allow a small cadre in the minority to wield immense power, and why we should abolish the filibuster.
If Republicans control the White House and Senate, but Democrats control the House of Representatives, then the shutdown was caused by an out-of-touch Republican president and tone-deaf Senate Republican majority that has callously rejected the national popular will, as it is expressed through the legislative priorities of the “People’s House,” just as the Founders intended.
If Democrats control the White House and Senate, but the Republicans control the House of Representatives, then fault for the shutdown must be laid at the feet of a House Republican caucus that has been hijacked by the extreme fringe of a once-sensible party. The situation presents a sad but enduring testament to the destructive power of Republican gerrymandering efforts that have artificially sustained the party’s House majority.
If Republicans control the White House and the House of Representatives, but Democrats control the Senate, then the shutdown reflects a GOP unwilling to come to terms with the need to share power with the opposition party in the world’s most deliberative body, the incomparable U.S. Senate. [...]
If Democrats control the White House but the Republicans control all of Congress, then the cause of the shutdown, obviously, is the party in control of Congress. Under the U.S. Constitution, Congress holds the federal purse-strings and is charged with appropriating money to fund the government. Failure to do so rests with the Republican-controlled Congress. The FederalistI really don't blame the Democrats for trying this. The Republicans have lost the game of chicken too many times. They have reason to test if the Scalia vacancy was just a fluke. Great news source you got there. I'm sure that makes sense if all you see is Red. But the reality is that if you control all the branches in Washington and you can't get shit done, that's squarely on you. Last shutdown you could maybe make a case for it being Obama's fault, but the Republicans bungled that and got blamed. This time they don't even have the excuse of an antagonistic president. The shutdown before that was also with a Republican Congress and a Democratic president... and while I don't remember what happened there, wikipedia seems to think that the Republicans caught the blame for that one too. And ironically, the one before that in 1990 was Newt Gingrich standing off against George HW Bush... it just seems to be a Republican thing to shut down government.
Yes, it is really just the partisan+ideological divides that give rise to excuses. The details change, but at the end it's the Republican's fault no matter the circumstances.
|
Deutsche Bank is best known as a money laundering operation for narco's and politicos around the world. I mean they paid almost $1,000,000,000 in fines without breaking a sweat.
Honestly, if I had to pick between them, I'd prefer the bankers go to prison and Trump just be disgraced (except among his most ardent supporters).
On January 20 2018 03:29 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 02:01 Acrofales wrote:On January 20 2018 01:23 Danglars wrote:On January 20 2018 01:00 Introvert wrote:
I see where the Democrat talking points are going. Dems refusing to fund anything in their defense of non-citizens after calling 2013 Republicans arsonists, anarchists, and legislative terrorists. But we're all going to hang our hat on the last second CHIP 6 year funding carrot. Humorous breakdown: As we consider yet another possible government shutdown, it’s important that we review the ground rules for how to approach the central issue that arises each time we face this calamity—namely, who is to blame for it.
If Republicans control both the White House and Congress, then the shutdown is their fault. That’s because Republicans were unwilling to negotiate with a Democratic minority that offered sensible, mature, and apolitical ideas for improving the spending bill.
The GOP must be reminded that in our system, holding a bare majority is not enough. The 60-vote supermajority threshold required to pass legislation in the Senate forces both sides to find common ground. The GOP should have worked harder to win votes from moderate Democratic senators to clear this procedural hurdle, which protects the vital interests of the congressional minority.
If Democrats control both the White House and Congress, then a shutdown must be the result of a small number of Republican senators filibustering the spending bill in reckless disregard for the urgency of funding the government. These senators are subverting the will of the duly elected majority, playing politics with our national security, and harming millions of hard-working civil servants and their families. The situation is a textbook illustration of how the anachronistic Senate rules allow a small cadre in the minority to wield immense power, and why we should abolish the filibuster.
If Republicans control the White House and Senate, but Democrats control the House of Representatives, then the shutdown was caused by an out-of-touch Republican president and tone-deaf Senate Republican majority that has callously rejected the national popular will, as it is expressed through the legislative priorities of the “People’s House,” just as the Founders intended.
If Democrats control the White House and Senate, but the Republicans control the House of Representatives, then fault for the shutdown must be laid at the feet of a House Republican caucus that has been hijacked by the extreme fringe of a once-sensible party. The situation presents a sad but enduring testament to the destructive power of Republican gerrymandering efforts that have artificially sustained the party’s House majority.
If Republicans control the White House and the House of Representatives, but Democrats control the Senate, then the shutdown reflects a GOP unwilling to come to terms with the need to share power with the opposition party in the world’s most deliberative body, the incomparable U.S. Senate. [...]
If Democrats control the White House but the Republicans control all of Congress, then the cause of the shutdown, obviously, is the party in control of Congress. Under the U.S. Constitution, Congress holds the federal purse-strings and is charged with appropriating money to fund the government. Failure to do so rests with the Republican-controlled Congress. The FederalistI really don't blame the Democrats for trying this. The Republicans have lost the game of chicken too many times. They have reason to test if the Scalia vacancy was just a fluke. Great news source you got there. I'm sure that makes sense if all you see is Red. But the reality is that if you control all the branches in Washington and you can't get shit done, that's squarely on you. Last shutdown you could maybe make a case for it being Obama's fault, but the Republicans bungled that and got blamed. This time they don't even have the excuse of an antagonistic president. The shutdown before that was also with a Republican Congress and a Democratic president... and while I don't remember what happened there, wikipedia seems to think that the Republicans caught the blame for that one too. And ironically, the one before that in 1990 was Newt Gingrich standing off against George HW Bush... it just seems to be a Republican thing to shut down government. Yes, it is really just the partisan+ideological divides that give rise to excuses. The details change, but at the end it's the Republican's Democrats fault no matter the circumstances.
Repeat ad nauseam and you have US politics for most of our lives.
|
On January 20 2018 03:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Deutsche Bank is best known as a money laundering operation for narco's and politicos around the world. I mean they paid almost $1,000,000,000 in fines without breaking a sweat. Honestly, if I had to pick between them, I'd prefer the bankers go to prison and Trump just be disgraced (except among his most ardent supporters).
If this is something they indeed endorse, why would they give up information about one of their own customers and potentially lose large amounts of revenue?
|
On January 20 2018 03:33 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 03:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Deutsche Bank is best known as a money laundering operation for narco's and politicos around the world. I mean they paid almost $1,000,000,000 in fines without breaking a sweat. Honestly, if I had to pick between them, I'd prefer the bankers go to prison and Trump just be disgraced (except among his most ardent supporters). If this is something they indeed endorse, why would they give up information about one of their own customers and potentially lose large amounts of revenue?
Because the German government is going to come for their ass. They regulate their banks for real over there.
|
On January 20 2018 03:35 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 03:33 Excludos wrote:On January 20 2018 03:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Deutsche Bank is best known as a money laundering operation for narco's and politicos around the world. I mean they paid almost $1,000,000,000 in fines without breaking a sweat. Honestly, if I had to pick between them, I'd prefer the bankers go to prison and Trump just be disgraced (except among his most ardent supporters). If this is something they indeed endorse, why would they give up information about one of their own customers and potentially lose large amounts of revenue? Because the German government is going to come for their ass. They regulate their banks for real over there.
Apparently not that effective if this is an operation which has been allowed to continue for long enough to earn them a "reputation" for it.
|
On January 20 2018 03:37 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 03:35 Plansix wrote:On January 20 2018 03:33 Excludos wrote:On January 20 2018 03:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Deutsche Bank is best known as a money laundering operation for narco's and politicos around the world. I mean they paid almost $1,000,000,000 in fines without breaking a sweat. Honestly, if I had to pick between them, I'd prefer the bankers go to prison and Trump just be disgraced (except among his most ardent supporters). If this is something they indeed endorse, why would they give up information about one of their own customers and potentially lose large amounts of revenue? Because the German government is going to come for their ass. They regulate their banks for real over there. Apparently not that effective if this is an operation which has been allowed to continue for long enough to earn them a "reputation" for it.
That is a really good point
|
On January 20 2018 03:37 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 03:35 Plansix wrote:On January 20 2018 03:33 Excludos wrote:On January 20 2018 03:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Deutsche Bank is best known as a money laundering operation for narco's and politicos around the world. I mean they paid almost $1,000,000,000 in fines without breaking a sweat. Honestly, if I had to pick between them, I'd prefer the bankers go to prison and Trump just be disgraced (except among his most ardent supporters). If this is something they indeed endorse, why would they give up information about one of their own customers and potentially lose large amounts of revenue? Because the German government is going to come for their ass. They regulate their banks for real over there. Apparently not that effective if this is an operation which has been allowed to continue for long enough to earn them a "reputation" for it.
I just double checked and its 150 years old, which is way older than I thought. This is not its first bout with being bad, so I have to assume that shutting it down isn’t the route they want to take.
Edit: Apparently it taken a bath for like 10 billion in the last year or so, 4 billion of that being litigation(60 billion on hand in liquid assets).
|
On January 20 2018 03:35 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 03:33 Excludos wrote:On January 20 2018 03:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Deutsche Bank is best known as a money laundering operation for narco's and politicos around the world. I mean they paid almost $1,000,000,000 in fines without breaking a sweat. Honestly, if I had to pick between them, I'd prefer the bankers go to prison and Trump just be disgraced (except among his most ardent supporters). If this is something they indeed endorse, why would they give up information about one of their own customers and potentially lose large amounts of revenue? Because the German government is going to come for their ass. They regulate their banks for real over there.
Really? Seems like they've been at this stuff for a while and just have to share the profits with certain interests.
From 2015:
Its US subsidiary settled charges by the Federal Reserve and the the New York Department of Financial Services over wiring a collective $11 billion in transactions on behalf of countries and entities subject to U.S. sanctions, including Iran, Libya, Syria, Burma, and Sudan between 1999 and 2006. It agreed to pay a total of $258 million to the two regulators.
From 2010:
Deutsche Bank agreed to pay $553 million and admit to criminal wrongdoing on Tuesday, settling a long-running investigation into tax shelter fraud that prosecutors say generated billions of dollars in bogus tax benefits.
In an agreement with the United States Attorney’s Office in Manhattan, Deutsche Bank will avoid prosecution for helping 2,100 customers evade taxes through 2,300 financial transactions. The arrangements, which took place between 1996 and 2002, helped wealthy Americans report more than $29 billion in fraudulent tax losses, according to the Justice Department.
It's so well known they are shady shitbag bankers that Jay-Z gave them a shoutout.
I’m getting ghost, I’m hearing noises
I think it’s the boys, but I been banking at Deutsche
|
On January 20 2018 03:33 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 03:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Deutsche Bank is best known as a money laundering operation for narco's and politicos around the world. I mean they paid almost $1,000,000,000 in fines without breaking a sweat. Honestly, if I had to pick between them, I'd prefer the bankers go to prison and Trump just be disgraced (except among his most ardent supporters). If this is something they indeed endorse, why would they give up information about one of their own customers and potentially lose large amounts of revenue?
not to nessarily agree with him; but as a general principle on criminal enterprises: it's occasionally worthwhile to give up high value targets to keep the heat from getting too high. you need to keep up just enough sufferance/goodwill that the government doesn't shut you down.
|
On January 20 2018 02:32 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 02:27 Plansix wrote:On January 20 2018 02:26 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 01:52 brian wrote:On January 20 2018 01:17 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 01:11 brian wrote:On January 20 2018 01:00 Introvert wrote:
I see where the Democrat talking points are going. Dems refusing to fund anything in their defense of non-citizens after calling 2013 Republicans arsonists, anarchists, and legislative terrorists. But we're all going to hang our hat on the last second CHIP 6 year funding carrot. i enjoy that you call children’s health insurance a carrot. that speaks volumes. The expected response. Devoid of anyt critical thought. No, I don't think "children's health insurance" is a "carrot." The extra SIX YEARS is a carrot. As I said before they've been haggling about how to pay for it for months. Also the GOP could prob get to 50, but as long as Dems are a hard no the wavering Republicans can stay a "no." This is a classic dilemma. I think last night McConnell asked Schumer to allow a majority vote. If Dems thought GOP couldn't get to 50 he would have allowed and have a super strong position. On January 20 2018 01:16 Logo wrote:On January 20 2018 01:12 zlefin wrote:
one thing I'll fault all sides on though, is not talking/doing enough on structural fixes to address the fact that problems like this occur.
simply not enough work is done on structure (admittedly most voters don't understand/care/vote on it, which makes it kinda hard) If the Republicans are repeatedly ok with passing bills that only have like a 30% general approval rating (if that) then I don't think voter popularity is much of an excuse. Tax law is much more popular now but popularity is bad reason to do things by itself anyways. save us your preachy bullshit, nobody made you say the words. i’m not a mind reader, apologies if you were as hollow as your representatives and only said it to troll. i had expected more. Read your first response again about what I said "speaking volumes." What response did you expect when you make such an accusation? The current CR is "clean." What is "stopping the Democrats from passing the clean CR?" "Nothing, except they are fighting over something unrelated to government funding." See? That works both ways! In fact the federal employees who won't get paid as long as this lasts are in danger more than CHIP! Every state is still dolling out cash. Maybe one stste will run out before the end of Feb, I think. I'd love if we passed individual appro bills but that would also undercut the Democrats portion, so that won't happen. If memory serves 2013 the GOP passed smaller funding bills for things like parks that Obama shut down. Both sides know that A) chip is not in imminent danger and B) that giving in on one things could cause a cascade that undermines their position. I don’t understand why you continue to act like we all don’t follow politics or have zero idea how congress works. I see one side that is dysfunctional and another that is picking an unrelated fight then whining about it. If this was reversed and the GOP minority was demanding a change in, say, chain migration, you'd flip your lid. But there is just too much partisan drama, I don't know if I've gone to bat for the GOP quite this much in a while.
You react to hypocrisy. "Just pass CHIP, don't tie it in!" "Just pass military and CHIP funding, don't tie in DACA!" (And they say Trump supporters are crazy. Lol)
|
On January 20 2018 03:43 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 02:32 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 02:27 Plansix wrote:On January 20 2018 02:26 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 01:52 brian wrote:On January 20 2018 01:17 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 01:11 brian wrote:On January 20 2018 01:00 Introvert wrote:
I see where the Democrat talking points are going. Dems refusing to fund anything in their defense of non-citizens after calling 2013 Republicans arsonists, anarchists, and legislative terrorists. But we're all going to hang our hat on the last second CHIP 6 year funding carrot. i enjoy that you call children’s health insurance a carrot. that speaks volumes. The expected response. Devoid of anyt critical thought. No, I don't think "children's health insurance" is a "carrot." The extra SIX YEARS is a carrot. As I said before they've been haggling about how to pay for it for months. Also the GOP could prob get to 50, but as long as Dems are a hard no the wavering Republicans can stay a "no." This is a classic dilemma. I think last night McConnell asked Schumer to allow a majority vote. If Dems thought GOP couldn't get to 50 he would have allowed and have a super strong position. On January 20 2018 01:16 Logo wrote:On January 20 2018 01:12 zlefin wrote:
one thing I'll fault all sides on though, is not talking/doing enough on structural fixes to address the fact that problems like this occur.
simply not enough work is done on structure (admittedly most voters don't understand/care/vote on it, which makes it kinda hard) If the Republicans are repeatedly ok with passing bills that only have like a 30% general approval rating (if that) then I don't think voter popularity is much of an excuse. Tax law is much more popular now but popularity is bad reason to do things by itself anyways. save us your preachy bullshit, nobody made you say the words. i’m not a mind reader, apologies if you were as hollow as your representatives and only said it to troll. i had expected more. Read your first response again about what I said "speaking volumes." What response did you expect when you make such an accusation? The current CR is "clean." What is "stopping the Democrats from passing the clean CR?" "Nothing, except they are fighting over something unrelated to government funding." See? That works both ways! In fact the federal employees who won't get paid as long as this lasts are in danger more than CHIP! Every state is still dolling out cash. Maybe one stste will run out before the end of Feb, I think. I'd love if we passed individual appro bills but that would also undercut the Democrats portion, so that won't happen. If memory serves 2013 the GOP passed smaller funding bills for things like parks that Obama shut down. Both sides know that A) chip is not in imminent danger and B) that giving in on one things could cause a cascade that undermines their position. I don’t understand why you continue to act like we all don’t follow politics or have zero idea how congress works. I see one side that is dysfunctional and another that is picking an unrelated fight then whining about it. If this was reversed and the GOP minority was demanding a change in, say, chain migration, you'd flip your lid. But there is just too much partisan drama, I don't know if I've gone to bat for the GOP quite this much in a while. You react to hypocrisy. "Just pass CHIP, don't tie it in!" "Just pass military and CHIP funding, don't tie in DACA!" (And they say Trump supporters are crazy. Lol) https://twitter.com/elliosch/status/954404476751884289
again, there’s only one party not down for passing clean CHIP. odd point to make as a conservative. if your argument is against making deals, well, i don’t know what to say to that. it’s a democracy. except i personally wouldn’t be comfortable holding certain things hostage. CHIP is on that level. for me DACA isn’t, so having this out here and now seems fairly appropriate. time to have the dealmaking talks, shitholes notwithstanding.
|
On January 20 2018 03:43 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 02:32 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 02:27 Plansix wrote:On January 20 2018 02:26 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 01:52 brian wrote:On January 20 2018 01:17 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 01:11 brian wrote:On January 20 2018 01:00 Introvert wrote:
I see where the Democrat talking points are going. Dems refusing to fund anything in their defense of non-citizens after calling 2013 Republicans arsonists, anarchists, and legislative terrorists. But we're all going to hang our hat on the last second CHIP 6 year funding carrot. i enjoy that you call children’s health insurance a carrot. that speaks volumes. The expected response. Devoid of anyt critical thought. No, I don't think "children's health insurance" is a "carrot." The extra SIX YEARS is a carrot. As I said before they've been haggling about how to pay for it for months. Also the GOP could prob get to 50, but as long as Dems are a hard no the wavering Republicans can stay a "no." This is a classic dilemma. I think last night McConnell asked Schumer to allow a majority vote. If Dems thought GOP couldn't get to 50 he would have allowed and have a super strong position. On January 20 2018 01:16 Logo wrote:On January 20 2018 01:12 zlefin wrote:
one thing I'll fault all sides on though, is not talking/doing enough on structural fixes to address the fact that problems like this occur.
simply not enough work is done on structure (admittedly most voters don't understand/care/vote on it, which makes it kinda hard) If the Republicans are repeatedly ok with passing bills that only have like a 30% general approval rating (if that) then I don't think voter popularity is much of an excuse. Tax law is much more popular now but popularity is bad reason to do things by itself anyways. save us your preachy bullshit, nobody made you say the words. i’m not a mind reader, apologies if you were as hollow as your representatives and only said it to troll. i had expected more. Read your first response again about what I said "speaking volumes." What response did you expect when you make such an accusation? The current CR is "clean." What is "stopping the Democrats from passing the clean CR?" "Nothing, except they are fighting over something unrelated to government funding." See? That works both ways! In fact the federal employees who won't get paid as long as this lasts are in danger more than CHIP! Every state is still dolling out cash. Maybe one stste will run out before the end of Feb, I think. I'd love if we passed individual appro bills but that would also undercut the Democrats portion, so that won't happen. If memory serves 2013 the GOP passed smaller funding bills for things like parks that Obama shut down. Both sides know that A) chip is not in imminent danger and B) that giving in on one things could cause a cascade that undermines their position. I don’t understand why you continue to act like we all don’t follow politics or have zero idea how congress works. I see one side that is dysfunctional and another that is picking an unrelated fight then whining about it. If this was reversed and the GOP minority was demanding a change in, say, chain migration, you'd flip your lid. But there is just too much partisan drama, I don't know if I've gone to bat for the GOP quite this much in a while. You react to hypocrisy. "Just pass CHIP, don't tie it in!" "Just pass military and CHIP funding, don't tie in DACA!" (And they say Trump supporters are crazy. Lol) https://twitter.com/elliosch/status/954404476751884289
As a concession, I will setting for Mitch McConnell leaving the leadership position and another Republican taking the job. Graham would be a fine replacement. DACA and CHIP would get done in 3 weeks.
|
On January 20 2018 03:45 brian wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 03:43 Danglars wrote:On January 20 2018 02:32 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 02:27 Plansix wrote:On January 20 2018 02:26 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 01:52 brian wrote:On January 20 2018 01:17 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 01:11 brian wrote:On January 20 2018 01:00 Introvert wrote:
I see where the Democrat talking points are going. Dems refusing to fund anything in their defense of non-citizens after calling 2013 Republicans arsonists, anarchists, and legislative terrorists. But we're all going to hang our hat on the last second CHIP 6 year funding carrot. i enjoy that you call children’s health insurance a carrot. that speaks volumes. The expected response. Devoid of anyt critical thought. No, I don't think "children's health insurance" is a "carrot." The extra SIX YEARS is a carrot. As I said before they've been haggling about how to pay for it for months. Also the GOP could prob get to 50, but as long as Dems are a hard no the wavering Republicans can stay a "no." This is a classic dilemma. I think last night McConnell asked Schumer to allow a majority vote. If Dems thought GOP couldn't get to 50 he would have allowed and have a super strong position. On January 20 2018 01:16 Logo wrote:On January 20 2018 01:12 zlefin wrote:
one thing I'll fault all sides on though, is not talking/doing enough on structural fixes to address the fact that problems like this occur.
simply not enough work is done on structure (admittedly most voters don't understand/care/vote on it, which makes it kinda hard) If the Republicans are repeatedly ok with passing bills that only have like a 30% general approval rating (if that) then I don't think voter popularity is much of an excuse. Tax law is much more popular now but popularity is bad reason to do things by itself anyways. save us your preachy bullshit, nobody made you say the words. i’m not a mind reader, apologies if you were as hollow as your representatives and only said it to troll. i had expected more. Read your first response again about what I said "speaking volumes." What response did you expect when you make such an accusation? The current CR is "clean." What is "stopping the Democrats from passing the clean CR?" "Nothing, except they are fighting over something unrelated to government funding." See? That works both ways! In fact the federal employees who won't get paid as long as this lasts are in danger more than CHIP! Every state is still dolling out cash. Maybe one stste will run out before the end of Feb, I think. I'd love if we passed individual appro bills but that would also undercut the Democrats portion, so that won't happen. If memory serves 2013 the GOP passed smaller funding bills for things like parks that Obama shut down. Both sides know that A) chip is not in imminent danger and B) that giving in on one things could cause a cascade that undermines their position. I don’t understand why you continue to act like we all don’t follow politics or have zero idea how congress works. I see one side that is dysfunctional and another that is picking an unrelated fight then whining about it. If this was reversed and the GOP minority was demanding a change in, say, chain migration, you'd flip your lid. But there is just too much partisan drama, I don't know if I've gone to bat for the GOP quite this much in a while. You react to hypocrisy. "Just pass CHIP, don't tie it in!" "Just pass military and CHIP funding, don't tie in DACA!" (And they say Trump supporters are crazy. Lol) https://twitter.com/elliosch/status/954404476751884289 again, there’s only one party not down for passing clean CHIP. odd point to make as a conservative. if your argument is against making deals, well, i don’t know what to say to that. except i personally wouldn’t be comfortable holding certain things hostage. CHIP is on that level. for me DACA isn’t, so having this out here and now seems fairly appropriate. time to have the dealmaking talks, shitholes notwithstanding.
There's only one party not down for passing clean CR.
|
On January 20 2018 03:45 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 03:43 Danglars wrote:On January 20 2018 02:32 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 02:27 Plansix wrote:On January 20 2018 02:26 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 01:52 brian wrote:On January 20 2018 01:17 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 01:11 brian wrote:On January 20 2018 01:00 Introvert wrote:
I see where the Democrat talking points are going. Dems refusing to fund anything in their defense of non-citizens after calling 2013 Republicans arsonists, anarchists, and legislative terrorists. But we're all going to hang our hat on the last second CHIP 6 year funding carrot. i enjoy that you call children’s health insurance a carrot. that speaks volumes. The expected response. Devoid of anyt critical thought. No, I don't think "children's health insurance" is a "carrot." The extra SIX YEARS is a carrot. As I said before they've been haggling about how to pay for it for months. Also the GOP could prob get to 50, but as long as Dems are a hard no the wavering Republicans can stay a "no." This is a classic dilemma. I think last night McConnell asked Schumer to allow a majority vote. If Dems thought GOP couldn't get to 50 he would have allowed and have a super strong position. On January 20 2018 01:16 Logo wrote:On January 20 2018 01:12 zlefin wrote:
one thing I'll fault all sides on though, is not talking/doing enough on structural fixes to address the fact that problems like this occur.
simply not enough work is done on structure (admittedly most voters don't understand/care/vote on it, which makes it kinda hard) If the Republicans are repeatedly ok with passing bills that only have like a 30% general approval rating (if that) then I don't think voter popularity is much of an excuse. Tax law is much more popular now but popularity is bad reason to do things by itself anyways. save us your preachy bullshit, nobody made you say the words. i’m not a mind reader, apologies if you were as hollow as your representatives and only said it to troll. i had expected more. Read your first response again about what I said "speaking volumes." What response did you expect when you make such an accusation? The current CR is "clean." What is "stopping the Democrats from passing the clean CR?" "Nothing, except they are fighting over something unrelated to government funding." See? That works both ways! In fact the federal employees who won't get paid as long as this lasts are in danger more than CHIP! Every state is still dolling out cash. Maybe one stste will run out before the end of Feb, I think. I'd love if we passed individual appro bills but that would also undercut the Democrats portion, so that won't happen. If memory serves 2013 the GOP passed smaller funding bills for things like parks that Obama shut down. Both sides know that A) chip is not in imminent danger and B) that giving in on one things could cause a cascade that undermines their position. I don’t understand why you continue to act like we all don’t follow politics or have zero idea how congress works. I see one side that is dysfunctional and another that is picking an unrelated fight then whining about it. If this was reversed and the GOP minority was demanding a change in, say, chain migration, you'd flip your lid. But there is just too much partisan drama, I don't know if I've gone to bat for the GOP quite this much in a while. You react to hypocrisy. "Just pass CHIP, don't tie it in!" "Just pass military and CHIP funding, don't tie in DACA!" (And they say Trump supporters are crazy. Lol) https://twitter.com/elliosch/status/954404476751884289 As a concession, I will setting for Mitch McConnell leaving the leadership position and another Republican taking the job. Graham would be a fine replacement. DACA and CHIP would get done in 3 weeks.
And Trump can claim he's a master negotiator to boot.
|
On January 20 2018 03:51 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2018 03:45 brian wrote:On January 20 2018 03:43 Danglars wrote:On January 20 2018 02:32 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 02:27 Plansix wrote:On January 20 2018 02:26 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 01:52 brian wrote:On January 20 2018 01:17 Introvert wrote:On January 20 2018 01:11 brian wrote:On January 20 2018 01:00 Introvert wrote:
I see where the Democrat talking points are going. Dems refusing to fund anything in their defense of non-citizens after calling 2013 Republicans arsonists, anarchists, and legislative terrorists. But we're all going to hang our hat on the last second CHIP 6 year funding carrot. i enjoy that you call children’s health insurance a carrot. that speaks volumes. The expected response. Devoid of anyt critical thought. No, I don't think "children's health insurance" is a "carrot." The extra SIX YEARS is a carrot. As I said before they've been haggling about how to pay for it for months. Also the GOP could prob get to 50, but as long as Dems are a hard no the wavering Republicans can stay a "no." This is a classic dilemma. I think last night McConnell asked Schumer to allow a majority vote. If Dems thought GOP couldn't get to 50 he would have allowed and have a super strong position. On January 20 2018 01:16 Logo wrote:On January 20 2018 01:12 zlefin wrote:
one thing I'll fault all sides on though, is not talking/doing enough on structural fixes to address the fact that problems like this occur.
simply not enough work is done on structure (admittedly most voters don't understand/care/vote on it, which makes it kinda hard) If the Republicans are repeatedly ok with passing bills that only have like a 30% general approval rating (if that) then I don't think voter popularity is much of an excuse. Tax law is much more popular now but popularity is bad reason to do things by itself anyways. save us your preachy bullshit, nobody made you say the words. i’m not a mind reader, apologies if you were as hollow as your representatives and only said it to troll. i had expected more. Read your first response again about what I said "speaking volumes." What response did you expect when you make such an accusation? The current CR is "clean." What is "stopping the Democrats from passing the clean CR?" "Nothing, except they are fighting over something unrelated to government funding." See? That works both ways! In fact the federal employees who won't get paid as long as this lasts are in danger more than CHIP! Every state is still dolling out cash. Maybe one stste will run out before the end of Feb, I think. I'd love if we passed individual appro bills but that would also undercut the Democrats portion, so that won't happen. If memory serves 2013 the GOP passed smaller funding bills for things like parks that Obama shut down. Both sides know that A) chip is not in imminent danger and B) that giving in on one things could cause a cascade that undermines their position. I don’t understand why you continue to act like we all don’t follow politics or have zero idea how congress works. I see one side that is dysfunctional and another that is picking an unrelated fight then whining about it. If this was reversed and the GOP minority was demanding a change in, say, chain migration, you'd flip your lid. But there is just too much partisan drama, I don't know if I've gone to bat for the GOP quite this much in a while. You react to hypocrisy. "Just pass CHIP, don't tie it in!" "Just pass military and CHIP funding, don't tie in DACA!" (And they say Trump supporters are crazy. Lol) https://twitter.com/elliosch/status/954404476751884289 again, there’s only one party not down for passing clean CHIP. odd point to make as a conservative. if your argument is against making deals, well, i don’t know what to say to that. except i personally wouldn’t be comfortable holding certain things hostage. CHIP is on that level. for me DACA isn’t, so having this out here and now seems fairly appropriate. time to have the dealmaking talks, shitholes notwithstanding. There's only one party not down for passing clean CR.
this is a lie, and in spite of the lie, a CR is on the level of things i’m willing to hold hostage personally. especially in context. holding DACA hostage leading to holding CR hostage is something i’m perfectly comfortable with.
but again, it’s just a lie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
