jrober38

A component of GDP is literally the amount of government spending an economy has. Historically when an economy is expanding, responsible governments typically reduce their deficit due to increased tax revenues. That's what happened from 2009 to 2017 (the deficit was reduced by about 60% from Obama's first year to his last). The exact opposite has happened under Trump. The GDP is great, partly due to increased government spending, however at the same time taxes have been reduced and the Treasury is bringing in less cash, and as a result the deficit has ballooned from $585 billion in 2016 to an estimated $1.1 trillion this year. If the economy slows down, and the treasury starts bringing in even less money, the deficit could explode even further. 8 years ago Republicans were up in arms about the deficit and the national debt, and now no one seems to care. It's very strange.

Exactly. AB didn't want to play for Buffalo. End of story.

Obama was effective delivering a few of his campaign platforms over the first two years. Then he lost the house. The last 3 weeks is how ineffective the Federal Government is going to be for the next two years. Nothing is going to be accomplished now that Trump lost the house, just like after Obama lost the house. The parties are too polarized and there's no common ground on anything they want to accomplish. Both guys relied heavily on Executive Orders.

My analysis is this - Dem support is essentially in lockstep with Trump's disapproval rating. 54% of people don't support the wall. 54% of people don't approve of Trump. Doesn't matter what he does, 54% of the country isn't going to support him just because they hate him so much. On the flip side, Trump's support is growing because it's becoming more and more clear that the Dems are being unreasonable. They all voted for this in the past and are playing hardball, trying to stop Trump from delivering his signature campaign promise. Undecided people are beginning to side with Trump because for $5 billion there's no reason to not build the wall. Reality is that support isn't going to fall for the Dems. They're not gaining support, but they're not losing any either. Trump's best case is 46% support which would need every undecided person to side with him, which is unlikely. The Dems will hold out indefinitely because their base supports that stance, and the only way this is ending is with Trump declaring an emergency, triggering the Dems into calling Trump a tyrant who is going around Congress and possibly starting his impeachment. Just my two cents.

Dem support has remained steady though. Until they start losing support or their position becomes unfavourable, they're not going to allow a wall to be built.

Not allowing Trump to fulfill his primary campaign promise. Without the construction of a "wall", Trump's base will fracture apart.

The shutdown won't end till Trump declares an emergency. No deal is going to be made here. Both sides are firmly entrenched in their positions, and at this point neither side can abandon their stance.

Maybe. I don't think that's a plan that would be implemented by Pelosi and Schumer because it wouldn't fly with their donors. The Dems rely heavily on donations from the rich, and they're not supporting any of those initiatives. Bernie was their best shot at shaking things up, but they screwed him 3 years ago. Their young people might be able to win local congressional seats, but their platforms and marketability won't fly on a national stage. I think O'Rourke winds up the guy. Gives them a real shot in Texas (potentially a huge swing state), has a relatively conservative voting track record, speaks well and would deliver a campaign based around hope and optimism (even if it has little substance) similar to Obama in 2008. Just a guess though. Will be interesting to see what happens.

Agreed. The only resolution here is Trump declaring an emergency and funding the wall on his own. The Dems will not cave. Trump will not cave. This is political stalemate where neither side has any motivation to compromise. Relying on Trump to shoot himself in the foot isn't a political strategy that actually works. His base love him, and they will continue vote for him until he gives them a reason not to. Not being Trump won't be a winning campaign in 2020.

I never said it would do any of those things. I more look at it as $5 billion spent (or $20 billion if they built the whole thing) to show everyone that building a wall isn't a real solution, and that a real plan needs to be implemented. As long as one side thinks a wall will solve their problems and the other says it won't is never going to result in meaningful progress. Stalemate isn't a solution. That won't happen. Voting against Trump as a Republican appears to be career suicide. His supporters will go out and primary you if you vote against his major policy plans.

100%. They could ask for practically anything right now and Trump would give it to them. They have no plan, and no strategy for actually winning the election in 2020. They're still operating on the 2016 game script which is letting Trump implode on himself, and voters viewing them as the next best option, but people don't go out to the polls for that reason. Letting Pelosi and Schumer run the party is a disaster in the making. They're both wildly unpopular among moderate voters, and they're going to wind up in a situation where whoever wins the nomination next year has to pick up the pieces from the disaster they will have created. At this stage I honestly don't see the shut down ending anytime soon if ended on a compromise. The Dems will not let him build the wall, and Trump will not agree to anything that doesn't fund the wall. The only solution will be for Trump to declare an emergency and fund it on his own, and then the Dems will go full into how he's a tyrant, he doesn't respect the rule or law, blah, blah, blah.

Agreed. The Democrats position is absurd. Saying it's too expensive when the US Budget is like $2 trillion is ridiculous. With that said, they've heavily weighed the pros and cons, and they've made a calculated decision where they essentially are conceding the 2020 election if they let Trump build his wall. Without the construction of his wall, the conservative pundits will fracture off, and his base won't show up to vote and he'll get obliterated at the polls in a landslide. The Dems have no platform, and because they can't run on the economy, or health care, the only thing they've got is trying to disappoint Trump's base, and they'll go to any length to get that done.

I'm not a conservative, but sometimes listen into conservative talk radio and try to listen to opinions from a variety of sources across the spectrum to gauge where people are coming from. It's a small sample, but some of the people who call in literally sound like they think a "wall" will completely block the flow of people across the southern border. It's as if they have no idea whatsoever how much commerce occurs there, and that those ports of entry where people cross legally and where so many tons of drugs come through undetected will remain open with a wall. A simple solution is good in theory, but it's not practical. Human beings have fled their homelands due to war, genocide, disease and famine for thousands of years, and that instinct isn't going to change suddenly with the creation of a wall. Desperate people with no hope or opportunity to better themselves or support their families will continue trying to get into the United States for as long as the reward outweighs the risk. The journey is too dangerous? Your risk getting raped or killed along the way? Not as bad as staying put and watching your kids starve to death due to the extreme poverty you face with no way out.

I'm not saying it won't help, but I'm yet to read anyone who is an expert on the border who thinks it will actually have a tangible effect on the drug trade or stop people from overstaying visas they were legally granted. The issue is that Trump is advertising this to his base as a panacea. Building the wall will stop drugs. Building the wall with stop illegal immigration. Building the wall will reduce crime. None of those things will actually happen in a way that makes a difference on people's lives. If your house is on fire and you use a fire extinguisher, sure, it'll help, but it's not putting out the fire. Same goes in this situation. A wall will help, but it won't change the other things that will continue happening. A simple solution to a complex problem almost certainly won't be successful. I'm in favour of building a wall (like you said, it'll help), I just get bothered when I see people making ridiculous claims like a wall alone will solve so many problems when that clearly won't actually be the case.

I think that if he wanted it built, he'd have figured out how to get it built by now. No serious plan was ever developed or prepared, and as a result they're stuck battling a democrat controlled house and chasing about 20% of the money needed to actually build the wall. I think Trump always liked the wall as something he could get people fired up about, and not something he was ever serious about actually building. That's just my opinion though.

I think the issue is that if you build a wall, and next to nothing changes, then what? It's been reported by the DEA that only a tiny percentage of drugs cross the border outside legal ports or entry, and also reported that the vast number of illegal aliens originally entered the country legally, and chose to overstay their visa. A wall isn't solving any of those issues. So if the wall gets built, and the drug epidemic continues and violent crime by non-citizens continues, then what?

Agreed. The democrat party as it's run now is horrible. Their leadership and their policies are a joke. I just don't get how someone can't run as a moderate. Take abortion and gay marriage off the table, and say you support them, while offering a reasonable spending approach to keep taxes in check and figure out ways to reduce spending. Most Americans agree with all of those things, and then let the crazies worry about the social stuff no one wants to talk about and the increased spending no one wants to pay for.

Really? What policies has he enacted that have led to the construction of a border wall? He's had 2 years. Why has nothing happened on that front yet? The answer is that he was never serious about actually doing it.

I heard somewhere that current Republican policy is shaped by the farthest right portion of the party, which is about 6% of the electorate, and democratic policy is shaped by the farthest left, which is about 8% of the electorate. The result is that the other 86% of Americans who are eligible to vote are in the "middle", stuck supporting two parties whose extreme views are shaped by a tiny portion of the total population. The two party system is a very broken system. It's unbelievable to me that there isn't a 3rd, "Moderate Party" out there who will run on a basic platform of controlling economic spending, and putting the social issues that divide the country to bed. Like 80% of Americans would support that type of platform, yet for some reason it doesn't exist.

I don't think Trump ever had any intention of actually building a wall. I think it was a punch line and someone people could associate with his "success" as a builder to help get him elected. I think it was a gimmick that he knew was never practical, and a punch line that separated him from all his Republican opponents in the primaries. Trump was fine folding on it a month ago, because he was never serious about getting it done. Then the right wing pundits went out in masse and said they could not support him going forward if he signed it, and got his base all riled up that if he couldn't deliver a wall he was a phony just like all the career politicians he constantly rails against. With the threat of fracturing base, which would result in a landslide election loss in two years, he dug in and made a political move to hold out for the wall even though every fact out there says it will have a minimal effect on reducing drugs or illegal immigration, and he's only getting about 20% of the money required to built it. If Trump was serious about building a wall, they would have started construction on it already. It's never been a priority of his, up until now when he risked losing his base.

This shut down is going to last a very long time. Trump caved to the right wing pundits, and if he gives up the wall they'll bury him and his base will jump ship. On the flip side, Pelosi and Schumer know they cannot under any circumstances allow Trump to deliver his #1 campaign promise, even if Mexico isn't paying for it. Both sides have backed themselves into a corner, and whoever "blinks" will likely lose the election in 22 months.

Nope. Josh Allen is never going to be a QB who completes quick, precise passes. We need an elite deep threat who can stretch the field.

No one is giving Tannehill a shot. He's a loser QB with no upside. Foles should stay in Philly. I don't know why he or the team would want him playing anywhere else.

The high school rating system generally rewards the biggest, strongest and fastest players. You're essentially just rewarding the most physically developed 17 and 18 year olds. Reality is that most 17 and 18 year old kids are nothing physically like what they'll become after 3-4 years in a college weight program. This is when 2 and 3 star guys develop into NFL prospects, because they get much bigger and stronger than they were as high school players, while the 5 star guys are already maxed out.

Aside from Flacco, I don't think any of these guys have any hope as a starter next season.