Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Nathanael D. Striker

U.S. Government Set to Shutdown for Third Time This Year

Recommended Posts

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/21/politics/cornyn-no-vote-government-shutdown/index.html

 

Government shutdowns, once a rarity, are now becoming commonplace. For this one, I put the blame on President Trump.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/white-house-signals-its-backing-down-in-shutdown-dispute-will-find-other-ways-to-fund-border-wall/2018/12/18/159994dc-02d9-11e9-9122-82e98f91ee6f_story.html

 

Earlier this week, Trump signaled he would be willing to back off his border wall demands to sign a short-term funding bill to keep the Government afloat until February. With that in mind, the Senate overwhelming passed a short-term funding bill with no border wall funding; however...

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/trump-continues-retreat-on-government-shutdown-threat-pledges-to-renew-border-control-battle-in-2019/2018/12/20/3143a752-0457-11e9-b6a9-0aa5c2fcc9e4_story.html

 

...Trump backpedaled and reinstating his demands, which frustrated Senators who had gone home already for Christmas. This was especially true after the House passed a short-term funding bill with border wall funding.

 

Since the two bills have yet to be reconciled, a shutdown starts in two and a half hours.

 

So, what are your thoughts on this? What should be done?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Long may she reign

 

CBS News: Senate adjourning until after Christmas with government partially shut down — live updates.

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/government-shutdown-2018-deadline-passed-meaning-latest-live-updates/?ftag=CNM-00-10aag7e

 

Merry Christmas, then. Not the best way to end the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CBS News: Senate adjourning until after Christmas with government partially shut down — live updates.

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/government-shutdown-2018-deadline-passed-meaning-latest-live-updates/?ftag=CNM-00-10aag7e

 

Merry Christmas, then. Not the best way to end the year.

 

How President Trump is handling the protection of U.S. borders: Approve 53% Disapprove 43% (NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll, 11/28 - 12/4/18)

 

http://www.pollingreport.com/trump_ad.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How President Trump is handling the protection of U.S. borders: Approve 53% Disapprove 43% (NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll, 11/28 - 12/4/18)

 

http://www.pollingreport.com/trump_ad.htm

Oh hey, a non-partisan poll (NPR/PBS). Still not worth shutting down the Government for, imo; however, I get why Trump is doing this. It's his last chance to get it before divided Government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh hey, a non-partisan poll (NPR/PBS). Still not worth shutting down the Government for, imo; however, I get why Trump is doing this. It's his last chance to get it before divided Government.

I mean it's not like he's asking for ALL the money, it's 5 billion dollars, or 1/1000th of the ~3.8 trillion yearly budget even if you use the bigger cost of 20 billion it's 1/250, that's probably more money than was not spent just in these shutdowns.

 

Pretty much the only reason to oppose it is that you don't want to enforce the border, period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Pretty much the only reason to oppose it is that you don't want to enforce the border, period.

That's the wrong path of thought. it's not that they don't want to enforce the border, it's that they can't see what good a wall will do. Some people really do not see the value of placing a physical barrier between america and mexico. Others cannot see the value in spending what is, to them, a massive amount of money (even if it only amounts to a drop in the bucket for the budget as a whole). The inability to see both sides of the argument is what lead to this in the first place.

 

I personally think trumps doing the right thing, Republicans, the ones closest to his side atm, have refused to back him when they could, Which is what's been making the entire project stall up to this point. It's pretty much a fact that democrats are going to stonewall this hard af once they get into office as well. Trump is playing full on hardball at this point because all other options have been kicked off the table by the republicans before the democrats even got the ability to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Obama in his 2013 SOTU support a barrier on the border? Wonder if he still believes that

You know, Trump could just extend the border fences already in place. There are about 580 miles of actual border fence when the border is almost 2,000 miles. Building The Great Wall of America is a waste of money when cheaper, less politically charged options exist. But of course, Trump's gotta have his Great Wall of America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, Trump could just extend the border fences already in place. There are about 580 miles of actual border fence when the border is almost 2,000 miles. Building The Great Wall of America is a waste of money when cheaper, less politically charged options exist. But of course, Trump's gotta have his Great Wall of America.

An 8 month pregnant woman scaled the fence and delivered her infant all in the span of a few hours. That fence sure works /s

 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/us/honduran-woman-19-in-migrant-caravan-scales-border-wall-to-give-birth-in-us-after-2000-mile-trip.amp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://theintercept.com/2019/01/15/mitch-mcconnell-government-shutdown-reelection/
 
Although the Senate has enough votes from both parties to reopen the government, this all comes down to Mitch McConnell blocking any efforts to reopen the government, because he refuses to break from Trump. He is up for reelection next year, and given that he has the lowest approval rating among currently sitting senators, he is desperate to keep his seat.

"He has steered clear of negotiations to end the shutdown, now in its fourth week. He rejected a compromise proposal from his own caucus to consider exchanging protections for Dreamers for wall funding."

 

This line stands out, because despite Trump's constant attempts to blame Democrats for the shutdown (Despite his promises not to do exactly that), it's plainly clear that Trump and McConnell have done far more to avoid making any compromise. Democrats have "come to the table", as it were, while Trump pounded in his fists on that table and walked out like a spoiled child angry he didn't get his shiny new Lego set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not quite the whole story though. Trump started out asking for 20 billion, and was respectful enough to hold off on holding the vote until the elections were over. post elections, democrats realized they would be able to hold out against trump no matter what, and shoved his wall funding bill back at the republicans, trump continuously lowered his request, till we hit the point now where it's literally a drop in the bucket compared to what we give out to foreign nations. This is the wall he has run on from day one. It's the flagship of his policy and there is nobody who doesn't know that. politicians on both sides have been begging for some form of barrier not ten years past, and some are actually  on record shitting on bush for his fence not being enough of one. Border security overwhelmingly supports the wall being funded and built, we have fledgling stats telling us that where the wall has already been built, illegal immigration related problems (aka gangs, drugs, human trafficking, ect) have fallen noticeably, and no matter who the blame falls on, trump has cut back enough money from his request that it's almost laughable that it hasn't been granted at this point (20+ billion to 5.5 billion is a massive reduction in asking price). We can ridicule him for not having mexico pay up front for it, and i support putting his feet to the fire there, but the fact is, till trump actually walked the walk, most politicians, including many of the ones blocking him, were all for a border barrier. and now all of a sudden, they're willing to shut down the government to prevent him from fulfilling the main thing he ran on, after he'd already cut at least 15 billion from the asking price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

illegal immigration related problems (aka gangs, drugs, human trafficking, ect) have fallen noticeably

Cite your sources here.

 

they're willing to shut down the government to prevent him from fulfilling the main thing he ran on, after he'd already cut at least 15 billion from the asking price.

"I am proud to shut down the government for border security. I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down.”

 

That is a direct quote from Trump himself. Trump openly admitted that he would be the one to shut down the government, and is only blaming the Democrats after the fact. Claiming that it's a "fact" that Democrats are the ones willing to shut down the government is just peddling the same false arguments as Trump, and ignores that they've already offered $1.3B for border security.

 

EDIT:

https://twitter.com/igorbobic/status/1085653924063862784

 

While it is a joke, I would like to reiterate the question: Can you show what efforts McConnell has personally made to reopen the government?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go.com: Trump postpones Pelosi's overseas trip after she proposed State of the

Union delay.

https://abcnews-go-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/trump-cancels-pelosis-trip-due-shutdown-called-state/story?id=60444910

 

I am not surprised that Trump did this, though I do see the reasoning for this decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go.com: Trump postpones Pelosi's overseas trip after she proposed State of the

Union delay.

https://abcnews-go-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/trump-cancels-pelosis-trip-due-shutdown-called-state/story?id=60444910

 

I am not surprised that Trump did this, though I do see the reasoning for this decision.

 

He's being petty and vindictive because she suggested delaying the State of the Union address. What's also important is that this trip was supposed to be kept under wraps to preserve national security, so he blew the lid on this out of pure spite.

 

There is no good reasoning it. It was just a stupid move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how Roxas just ignore my post clearly calling out his hipocracy 


Watching the media flail around trying to defend the Dems and attack Trump is very amusing.

 

They’re tweeting furiously about Davos, the First Lady and Trump revealing top secret travel plans. They’re just throwing up anything at the wall at this point.

 

And when Obama refused to sign a spending bill, it was never called the Obama shutdown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

He's being petty and vindictive because she suggested delaying the State of the Union address. What's also important is that this trip was supposed to be kept under wraps to preserve national security, so he blew the lid on this out of pure spite.

 

There is no good reasoning it. It was just a stupid move.

Well, he shut the trip down, so there's not really a lid to be blown at this point. petty or not, politics has always been dirty. Look at the people trying to make him a villain for spending 3K+ of his own money on mcdonalds for a couple hungry college students during the shutdown. people on both sides are pretty terrible to each other right about now..

 

 

 

Cite your sources here.
 


"I am proud to shut down the government for border security. I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down.”

 

That is a direct quote from Trump himself. Trump openly admitted that he would be the one to shut down the government, and is only blaming the Democrats after the fact. Claiming that it's a "fact" that Democrats are the ones willing to shut down the government is just peddling the same false arguments as Trump, and ignores that they've already offered $1.3B for border security.

 

EDIT:

https://twitter.com/igorbobic/status/1085653924063862784

 

While it is a joke, I would like to reiterate the question: Can you show what efforts McConnell has personally made to reopen the government?

 

https://nypost.com/2018/01/13/we-already-have-a-border-wall-and-it-works/

These are stats from one of the better portions of the wall completed during the bush era (which is still far smaller than the wall trump is proposing and constructing). That's over ten years of info collecting, though it's in a smaller area in general than the total wall we're gunning for. so in short, we have a smaller wall than trump has been building, with sustained stats from the bush era. the wall there has been followed by a massive reduction in crime, and yet remains close to what has been known as one of the more dangerous border areas. that's pretty strong evidence that walls, while not a guaranteed solution, are pretty good at dissuading criminals from coming over the border to your particular area. keep in mind, this is without the additional kinds of surveillance that trump has also proposed, and requested a budget for. in short, we've got data that tells us a wall, even smaller than what trump is asking for, can do the trick pretty well.

 

 

I'm not saying trump's not responsible for shutting it down. What i'm saying is that the democrats are responsible for not getting it open again. it's 5 billion, 20-15 billion less than the starting price, and less money than we gave to south america just last year. We know the wall can do it's job (if backed by proper legislation, surveillance, and and removed incentives), and the people obstructing it today were asking for a border barrier decades ago, claiming bush's fences were not enough just a decade ago. This is nowhere near the first thing they've flipped on recently.

 

 

 

As a side note: https://www.fairus.org/issue/national-security/current-state-border-fence  Thisis a report on the walls costs as estimated by professional building contractors and determined by prior pecedents. The short of it is, the wall, if built using the same materials we're already using, in a similar manner to israel, would cost around 25 billion, and would be about 40 feet high and 7 feet deep. Personally i would prefer it be 30 feet high and 17 feet deep to further dissuade tunnels, but i suppose that would be a bit more expensive, to the tune of probably 5-10 billion extra. As digging deeper would be more difficult than building higher. Even so, considering we gave out far more than 35 billion in foreign aid, and our entitlement spending for many programs are generally far higher than 35 billion (some being closer to the trillion mark), i'd say it's pocket change (in government terms) and is only being postponed because they don't like the person promoting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, he shut the trip down, so there's not really a lid to be blown at this point. petty or not, politics has always been dirty. Look at the people trying to make him a villain for spending 3K+ of his own money on mcdonalds for a couple hungry college students during the shutdown. people on both sides are pretty terrible to each other right about now.

The lid was blown because he shut the trip down. And yes, politics has always been dirty, which is why he is being criticized for the decision.

 

Him spending money on McDonald's is not why people are calling him evil. It's that he had to do so because the White House's chefs are going unpaid because of the shutdown. He's being derided as pathetic for the McDonald's meal, and his being labeled a villain because of the shutdown. They are two circumstances that directly overlap, but it does not mean people are calling him a villain because he paid for McDonald's.

 

https://nypost.com/2018/01/13/we-already-have-a-border-wall-and-it-works/

These are stats from one of the better portions of the wall completed during the bush era (which is still far smaller than the wall trump is proposing and constructing). That's over ten years of info collecting, though it's in a smaller area in general than the total wall we're gunning for. so in short, we have a smaller wall than trump has been building, with sustained stats from the bush era. the wall there has been followed by a massive reduction in crime, and yet remains close to what has been known as one of the more dangerous border areas. that's pretty strong evidence that walls, while not a guaranteed solution, are pretty good at dissuading criminals from coming over the border to your particular area. keep in mind, this is without the additional kinds of surveillance that trump has also proposed, and requested a budget for. in short, we've got data that tells us a wall, even smaller than what trump is asking for, can do the trick pretty well.

 

What exactly is Trump asking for that makes his own plans for a wall superior to the border fence that we have now? What would that do to further decrease crime?

 

I'm not saying trump's not responsible for shutting it down. What i'm saying is that the democrats are responsible for not getting it open again. it's 5 billion, 20-15 billion less than the starting price, and less money than we gave to south america just last year. We know the wall can do it's job (if backed by proper legislation, surveillance, and and removed incentives), and the people obstructing it today were asking for a border barrier decades ago, claiming bush's fences were not enough just a decade ago. This is nowhere near the first thing they've flipped on recently.

 

Democrats pushed for a bill specifically designed to open the government, only for it to be blocked by McConnell, and, again, they explicitly offered 1.3 billion for a border fence. That is neither obstruction, nor does it mean that they are the ones responsible for not opening the government again. It's McConnell and Trump outright rejecting the efforts that Democrats have made to open the government.

 

As a side note: https://www.fairus.org/issue/national-security/current-state-border-fence  Thisis a report on the walls costs as estimated by professional building contractors and determined by prior pecedents. The short of it is, the wall, if built using the same materials we're already using, in a similar manner to israel, would cost around 25 billion, and would be about 40 feet high and 7 feet deep. Personally i would prefer it be 30 feet high and 17 feet deep to further dissuade tunnels, but i suppose that would be a bit more expensive, to the tune of probably 5-10 billion extra. As digging deeper would be more difficult than building higher. Even so, considering we gave out far more than 35 billion in foreign aid, and our entitlement spending for many programs are generally far higher than 35 billion (some being closer to the trillion mark), i'd say it's pocket change (in government terms) and is only being postponed because they don't like the person promoting it.

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/schumer-explains-why-democrats-oppose-trumps-wall-theres-no-plan-build-it

 

The answer is actually much simpler than that: Trump just hasn't provided a detailed plan for how to build it. They're not opposing because they don't like the person promoting it; it's because there's a clear process that needs to be followed, such as asking owners to give up land that would need to be used for the wall, and Trump has shown no indication that he would follow that process. If Trump cannot clearly lay out how he would be able to gain the land necessary for the wall, why should Democrats support it? It would still be setting aside too much money without a coherent plan for how to use that money.

 

It's just not Democrats in Congress that are obstructing him; it's landowners refusing to let him use their property. Democrats also asked him how he plans to take land from unwilling churches, so the burden is still on Trump. If the issue is that the people who do not concede to Trump's demands are responsible for the government not being open again, does that mean it's the landowners who are responsible for the continuing shutdown?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What exactly is Trump asking for that makes his own plans for a wall superior to the border fence that we have now? What would that do to further decrease crime?

 

 

Democrats pushed for a bill specifically designed to open the government, only for it to be blocked by McConnell, and, again, they explicitly offered 1.3 billion for a border fence. That is neither obstruction, nor does it mean that they are the ones responsible for not opening the government again. It's McConnell and Trump outright rejecting the efforts that Democrats have made to open the government.

 

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/schumer-explains-why-democrats-oppose-trumps-wall-theres-no-plan-build-it

 

The answer is actually much simpler than that: Trump just hasn't provided a detailed plan for how to build it. They're not opposing because they don't like the person promoting it; it's because there's a clear process that needs to be followed, such as asking owners to give up land that would need to be used for the wall, and Trump has shown no indication that he would follow that process. If Trump cannot clearly lay out how he would be able to gain the land necessary for the wall, why should Democrats support it? It would still be setting aside too much money without a coherent plan for how to use that money.

 

It's just not Democrats in Congress that are obstructing him; it's landowners refusing to let him use their property. Democrats also asked him how he plans to take land from unwilling churches, so the burden is still on Trump. If the issue is that the people who do not concede to Trump's demands are responsible for the government not being open again, does that mean it's the landowners who are responsible for the continuing shutdown?

 

the fact that the border fense is barely complete, as explained in the second article kinda makes it superior. it would cover more ground that is currently unprotected by any manner of barrier, and even with 7 feet of depth, t would do more to dissuade tunnels than the current wall does.

 

they are trying to cut funding down to 1 billion, after it's already been cut down to 5 billion from 20+ billion. that's not compromise, that's a leash. 5 billion is barely enough to do what trump is asking for properly, and it goes to far mor htan just building the wall, it also applies to the border agents, testing new methods, and looking into even better material and technology to use in combination with the wall. can you really tell me that him reducing his budget request by 75% is him being unwilling to compromise?

 

 

Thing is, he's already building it, and he does not yet have to touch land that is owned by other people. That's the definition of a red herring. that's the kind of problem that can be solved as they go along, and has nothing to do with the work that's already being done. Not that it's unimportant, only that it's not so big on an issue that they should be holding the entirety of it hostage, and they're betrayed by their own words. what difference, on thir end, does 1.3 billion make in comparison to 5 billion, when it comes to discussing land rights? It's underway already, the materials have been decided, and the wall would be going along at a steady pace if he had the funding. land rights is an important discussion, but they are flat out bullshitting if that's their reasoning. Why even approve of 1.3 billion if the real reason is land rights? the difference, as far as democrats would be concerned, is minuscule, and if that's really the case, then the more money he has to work with, the better that particular roadblock would go, as he could more easily fund reimbursement efforts for those who wished it, with a proper budget.

 

 

They can build right outside the owned area if that's the case. This isn't a supermall, It's  a border wall. They don't need so much room that they would absolutely have to build it on the land of the people who object when they could build it right outside their property space. If mexico objects to having their land encroached a bit, he can counter by telling them it's either that, or force their government to take responsibility for the actions of their cartels. In other words, he can play nice with the american land owners, and take it out on mexico like he said from the start. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the fact that the border fense is barely complete, as explained in the second article kinda makes it superior. it would cover more ground that is currently unprotected by any manner of barrier, and even with 7 feet of depth, t would do more to dissuade tunnels than the current wall does.

 

they are trying to cut funding down to 1 billion, after it's already been cut down to 5 billion from 20+ billion. that's not compromise, that's a leash. 5 billion is barely enough to do what trump is asking for properly, and it goes to far mor htan just building the wall, it also applies to the border agents, testing new methods, and looking into even better material and technology to use in combination with the wall. can you really tell me that him reducing his budget request by 75% is him being unwilling to compromise?

 

 

Thing is, he's already building it, and he does not yet have to touch land that is owned by other people. That's the definition of a red herring. that's the kind of problem that can be solved as they go along, and has nothing to do with the work that's already being done. Not that it's unimportant, only that it's not so big on an issue that they should be holding the entirety of it hostage, and they're betrayed by their own words. what difference, on thir end, does 1.3 billion make in comparison to 5 billion, when it comes to discussing land rights? It's underway already, the materials have been decided, and the wall would be going along at a steady pace if he had the funding. land rights is an important discussion, but they are flat out bullshitting if that's their reasoning. Why even approve of 1.3 billion if the real reason is land rights? the difference, as far as democrats would be concerned, is minuscule, and if that's really the case, then the more money he has to work with, the better that particular roadblock would go, as he could more easily fund reimbursement efforts for those who wished it, with a proper budget.

 

 

They can build right outside the owned area if that's the case. This isn't a supermall, It's  a border wall. They don't need so much room that they would absolutely have to build it on the land of the people who object when they could build it right outside their property space. If mexico objects to having their land encroached a bit, he can counter by telling them it's either that, or force their government to take responsibility for the actions of their cartels. In other words, he can play nice with the american land owners, and take it out on mexico like he said from the start.

 

 

The border fence is incomplete because of the land ownership issues in Texas. This isn't a problem that can be solved "as they go along"; it's the immediate issue at hand.

 

Trump stormed out of a bipartisan meeting, and the fact that the Democrats were even willing to lend any money still completely flies at odds with Trump and McConnell claiming that they're refusing to fund the wall at all. While you offered examples of what else that money could go towards, has Trump himself explicitly laid out how the 5 billion that he is asking for would be allocated and spent?

 

You're conflating two completely separate issues, so claiming that this is somehow a red herring disregards that there can be multiple factors. The difference between 1.3 billion and 5 billion has nothing to do with the land rights; the first is a matter of him having the funds to build the wall, and the second is whether or not he has the legal authority to do so. It is the combination of both factors (among others) that have progress on the wall. It's also difficult to claim that the materials have been decide when Trump has been inconsistent about that.

 

You also seem to be under the impression that the land rights are the Democrats' reasoning, so I encourage you look at it again. The reasoning the Democrats gave was that he has no plan. Land rights were not brought up by Democrats (Or if they were, that's not at all what I was talking about), but rather independent homeowners have been suing against land seizures on their own.

 

Homeland Security had to build gates to claim that they technically did not seize property, so while they could build land outside of the owned area, the only way to do so would simply perpetuate the perceived weaknesses in the current fence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...