The Trump Shutdown

[Q-baby!]

7 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

Well, reread my post.  I added flavor.

 

And you're an idiot to not understand that Trump can't open the government without a budget. Nothing has been given to him.  Can you sit down, shut up and stop blabbering.

 

And obama did far worse with his health Care bull#### that doesn't even relate to this.  So, again, go away.

Get back to work you mindless farmhand. 

[boyst]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

More meaningless posting.  Trump can open the government right now by allowing the budget bills that have been passed by both chambers to go forward.  That is the reality of the situation.  You have no idea what you're talking about. 

 

We will start with this.

 

Please, tell me how he does this.  Please tell me what Rachel Maddow and Your friends at CNN said he can do.

 

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

Is it your position that any chief executive, regardless of party, can simply shut down government if he or she does not get his way?  You do understand the concept of co-equal branches of government?

Did Trump demand the shutdown?  No

Did Trump get a presentation of a bill to sign

?  No.

 

And yes, far better than you grandpa.

[GG]

6 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

More meaningless posting.  Trump can open the government right now by allowing the budget bills that have been passed by both chambers to go forward.  That is the reality of the situation.  You have no idea what you're talking about. 

 

Is it your position that any chief executive, regardless of party, can simply shut down government if he or she does not get his way?  You do understand the concept of co-equal branches of government?

 

Exactly which budget bills have been passed by both chambers and are ready for POTUS signature?

[oldmanfan]

4 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

We will start with this.

 

Please, tell me how he does this.  Please tell me what Rachel Maddow and Your friends at CNN said he can do.

 

Did Trump demand the shutdown?  No

Did Trump get a presentation of a bill to sign

?  No.

 

And yes, far better than you grandpa.

My  friends at whatever.  Laughable. 

Did Trump demand the shutdown/  Are you serious?  Go back and watch the film of him in the White House with Pelosi and Schumer.  What did he say?  He'd be proud to own the shut down.  His words, said for all to hear.  Words matter.  I entered into this conversation because someone above said that language should be precise.  Well, the president was precise.  Now he owns it.  And to deny that is ridiculous. 

 

Did he get a bill to sign?  No, because despite the Senate having a bill that passed by 100-0 and the House as well, the president said he wouldn't sign it if it hit his desk.  So again it's on him.

 

Not to say the Democrats should negotiate.  I think those who work this problem everyday tell us that walls in specific areas would be helpful, and those should be built.  But there is one guy who can open government right now and he sits in the Oval office.

2 minutes ago, GG said:

 

Exactly which budget bills have been passed by both chambers and are ready for POTUS signature?

Back in December the Senate passed one.  The current House passed the same one.  If the Senate simply voted the same way they did a month of so ago you have it.  But the President in December said he wouldn't sign it.

 

You can try and deflect all you want, but only one person sat on live TV and claimed he'd be proud to shut the government down.  And now he wants to weasel out of taking that responsibility, and folks like you want to let him. 

[3rdnlng]

10 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Not sure where you're going with this.  But if words and precision matter, then the president owns the shut down.  Why?  Because that's what he said.

 

Now the Democrats could be more forthcoming in negotiations to be sure, but their stance is they will do so once the government is reopened.  Only one person has the power to reopen government right now, the chief executive.  And he won't do it.

Words matter.

 

Trump: Nancy, if I agree to this 30 continuing resolution will you agree to negotiate on a wall within those 30 days?

 

Nancy: No.

 

Let there be no doubt that those opposed to a wall really don't give one flyingshit about children being smuggled across our border and sold into sex slavery. Illegal aliens in most cases don't care if they get caught. They're fine with "catch & release". Child smugglers don't get paid if they are caught and therefore need to secretly cross the border with their soon-to-be slaves. Walls funnel all people crossing the border into well patrolled areas where we have the ability to discern their intentions.

 

We've been down this road before and don't want to get fooled again. Think of Lucy as the dems and Charlie Brown as the people that want the wall.

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

Words matter.

 

Trump: Nancy, if I agree to this 30 continuing resolution will you agree to negotiate on a wall within those 30 days?

 

Nancy: No.

 

Let there be no doubt that those opposed to a wall really don't give one flyingshit about children being smuggled across our border and sold into sex slavery. Illegal aliens in most cases don't care if they get caught. They're fine with "catch & release". Child smugglers don't get paid if they are caught and therefore need to secretly cross the border with their soon-to-be slaves. Walls funnel all people crossing the border into well patrolled areas where we have the ability to discern their intentions.

 

We've been down this road before and don't want to get fooled again. Think of Lucy as the dems and Charlie Brown as the people that want the wall.

I believe I have indicated blame an be assigned to all sides here.  As I said above I am in favor of walls in specific areas where experts say it would matter.  But there is only one person who can open government right now, and it's not Pelosi.  It's the President.

 

If I were POTUS, I would reopen right now, negotiate like hell for 30 days, and the if the Dems refuse to negotiate fairly I'd declare the emergency (although I would also say it's hard to figure out why it's an emergency now when it wasn't for two years prior) and beat the Dems over the head with it when elections come up. 

 

The person who looks the best in his will be the person who the public thinks got the government reopened and checks flowing to the workers.  The Dems right now are in the cat bird's seat because they keep saying they want to reopen then negotiate.  The President's words that he'd be proud to shut down the government are coming back to haunt him.  Again, words matter.

 

 

[3rdnlng]

4 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

My  friends at whatever.  Laughable. 

Did Trump demand the shutdown/  Are you serious?  Go back and watch the film of him in the White House with Pelosi and Schumer.  What did he say?  He'd be proud to own the shut down.  His words, said for all to hear.  Words matter.  I entered into this conversation because someone above said that language should be precise.  Well, the president was precise.  Now he owns it.  And to deny that is ridiculous. 

 

Did he get a bill to sign?  No, because despite the Senate having a bill that passed by 100-0 and the House as well, the president said he wouldn't sign it if it hit his desk.  So again it's on him.

 

Not to say the Democrats should negotiate.  I think those who work this problem everyday tell us that walls in specific areas would be helpful, and those should be built.  But there is one guy who can open government right now and he sits in the Oval office.

Back in December the Senate passed one.  The current House passed the same one.  If the Senate simply voted the same way they did a month of so ago you have it.  But the President in December said he wouldn't sign it.

 

You can try and deflect all you want, but only one person sat on live TV and claimed he'd be proud to shut the government down.  And now he wants to weasel out of taking that responsibility, and folks like you want to let him. 

Words matter and precision is important. He said he'd be proud to take the blame, not proud to shut the government down. He's fighting for a principle, not politically maneuvering like Pelosi & Schumer. Again, anyone that has half a brain and has the real need of a wall explained to them are complicit in child sex slavery if they don't want a wall. How does it feel?

[GG]

9 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

My  friends at whatever.  Laughable. 

Did Trump demand the shutdown/  Are you serious?  Go back and watch the film of him in the White House with Pelosi and Schumer.  What did he say?  He'd be proud to own the shut down.  His words, said for all to hear.  Words matter.  I entered into this conversation because someone above said that language should be precise.  Well, the president was precise.  Now he owns it.  And to deny that is ridiculous. 

 

Did he get a bill to sign?  No, because despite the Senate having a bill that passed by 100-0 and the House as well, the president said he wouldn't sign it if it hit his desk.  So again it's on him.

 

Not to say the Democrats should negotiate.  I think those who work this problem everyday tell us that walls in specific areas would be helpful, and those should be built.  But there is one guy who can open government right now and he sits in the Oval office.

Back in December the Senate passed one.  The current House passed the same one.  If the Senate simply voted the same way they did a month of so ago you have it.  But the President in December said he wouldn't sign it.

 

You can try and deflect all you want, but only one person sat on live TV and claimed he'd be proud to shut the government down.  And now he wants to weasel out of taking that responsibility, and folks like you want to let him. 

 

So in summary, there wasn't any bill that passed both chambers that is ready for Trump's signature, and he's the only roadblock.

[oldmanfan]

Just now, 3rdnlng said:

Words matter and precision is important. He said he'd be proud to take the blame, not proud to shut the government down. He's fighting for a principle, not politically maneuvering like Pelosi & Schumer. Again, anyone that has half a brain and has the real need of a wall explained to them are complicit in child sex slavery if they don't want a wall. How does it feel?

He said he'd take the blame, then he is to blame.  Words matter.  And did I not just say above I am in favor of a wall in areas where experts say it's needed?   Save your childish responses for elsewhere.

1 minute ago, GG said:

 

So in summary, there wasn't any bill that passed both chambers that is ready for Trump's signature, and he's the only roadblock.

Yes, because he said he wouldn't sign it, so it wasn't presented to him.  You have a Senate majority leader who refuses to understand the constitutional responsibilities of the Senate.

[GG]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

He said he'd take the blame, then he is to blame.  Words matter.  And did I not just say above I am in favor of a wall in areas where experts say it's needed?   Save your childish responses for elsewhere.

Yes, because he said he wouldn't sign it, so it wasn't presented to him.  You have a Senate majority leader who refuses to understand the constitutional responsibilities of the Senate.

 

So in summary, there wasn't a bill for him to sign.

 

As someone said, words matter.

[KRC]

3 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

If I were POTUS, I would reopen right now, negotiate like hell for 30 days, and the if the Dems refuse to negotiate fairly I'd declare the emergency (although I would also say it's hard to figure out why it's an emergency now when it wasn't for two years prior) and beat the Dems over the head with it when elections come up.

 

 

 

Nancy has already stated that she refuses to negotiate, even if Trump reopens the government. So, explain again why he should open it?

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, GG said:

 

So in summary, there wasn't a bill for him to sign.

 

As someone said, words matter.

So they should have put the bill in front of him, then not have him sign?  I could go along with that.  In fact that is exactly what should happen if the Congress was doing its job.  The House sent the same bill that the Senate approved a month ago.  The Senate should vote on it, pass it (unless they are so spineless that they change their votes within a month), put it on the President's desk.  If he vetoes then the Congress can decide if they override the veto and put people back to work.

 

That is how our government is supposed to work.  But, again, Trump is the only one right now who can reopen government.  If he indicates he'd sign that then it's over with today.  But, no, he's proud to shut it down.

3 minutes ago, KRC said:

 

Nancy has already stated that she refuses to negotiate, even if Trump reopens the government. So, explain again why he should open it?

Because there are 800,000 people not being paid, and because it is affecting our national security.  Open it, and if the Dems refuse to negotiate in good faith then you have a ready made political hammer to use. 

 

I just said above there is room to blame for both sides.  Try reading. 

[boyst]

18 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

My  friends at whatever.  Laughable. 

Did Trump demand the shutdown/  Are you serious?  Go back and watch the film of him in the White House with Pelosi and Schumer.  What did he say?  He'd be proud to own the shut down.  His words, said for all to hear.  Words matter.  I entered into this conversation because someone above said that language should be precise.  Well, the president was precise.  Now he owns it.  And to deny that is ridiculous. 

 

Did he get a bill to sign?  No, because despite the Senate having a bill that passed by 100-0 and the House as well, the president said he wouldn't sign it if it hit his desk.  So again it's on him.

 

Not to say the Democrats should negotiate.  I think those who work this problem everyday tell us that walls in specific areas would be helpful, and those should be built.  But there is one guy who can open government right now and he sits in the Oval office.

Back in December the Senate passed one.  The current House passed the same one.  If the Senate simply voted the same way they did a month of so ago you have it.  But the President in December said he wouldn't sign it.

 

You can try and deflect all you want, but only one person sat on live TV and claimed he'd be proud to shut the government down.  And now he wants to weasel out of taking that responsibility, and folks like you want to let him. 

I stopped reading after you said words matter and over action.

 

This explains a lot of why your side and buddies on the left are losing. The NPC. Words matter. Yep, calling yourself a tranny because you wanna tuck when you got a schlong works for you.  Calling yourself an American when you're against free speech works for you, oddly ironic because... Words over action and most importantly words over action.

 

Jesus, it's like you're so unhinged you have no critical thinking ability or insight to look introspectively. Feeble af, brah

[3rdnlng]

4 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

He said he'd take the blame, then he is to blame.  Words matter.  And did I not just say above I am in favor of a wall in areas where experts say it's needed?   Save your childish responses for elsewhere.

You say you are for walls but blame Trump for fighting for them. It's Trump's fault for the shutdown but not Pelosi's fault for refusing to negotiate? You're crusading.

[GG]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

So they should have put the bill in front of him, then not have him sign?  I could go along with that.  In fact that is exactly what should happen if the Congress was doing its job.  The House sent the same bill that the Senate approved a month ago.  The Senate should vote on it, pass it (unless they are so spineless that they change their votes within a month), put it on the President's desk.  If he vetoes then the Congress can decide if they override the veto and put people back to work.

 

That is how our government is supposed to work.  But, again, Trump is the only one right now who can reopen government.  If he indicates he'd sign that then it's over with today.  But, no, he's proud to shut it down.

 

Let's try this again. 

 

You explicitly said that the shutdown is responsibility of one man who's refused to sign "bills" that were passed by both chambers.   Yet, there was no bill that's crossed his desk. 

 

Wouldn't that also make other people responsible?

[B-Man]

Lost in the twin hoaxes of Buzzfeed and Big Chief Lie A Lot is the collapse of the House Dems plan to resist funding a border wall.

 

Pelosi doesn’t have the votes to win her opposition to border security.

I’m guessing the Trump plan could garner as much as 30 democrats, if presented, as is.

 

Steny Hoyer’s appearance on Cavuto signaled that the moderates are getting ready to jump ship.

Throw in Colin PetersonD-MN, and Elaine LuriaD-VA calls for a vote and the ‘resistance’ in the democrat house seems to be growing.

 

In theory she can block the vote, but even the Dems advising her to submit her own plan know she lacks popular support to produce one. The longer she goes without allowing efforts at a deal, the faster her power erodes. Pelosi is hoping Schumer can buy her time, but that time is just bleeding her support, further.

 

 

[KRC]

1 minute ago, GG said:

 

Let's try this again. 

 

You explicitly said that the shutdown is responsibility of one man who's refused to sign "bills" that were passed by both chambers.   Yet, there was no bill that's crossed his desk. 

 

Wouldn't that also make other people responsible?

 

No. You don't understand. Trump is the only person who can reopen the government. Except for Congress' ability to reopen the government. But it is Trump that is the only person that can reopen the government.

 

Or something like that.

 

I have been told that I need to try reading. Maybe that will help me understand the abortion of a point that he is trying to make.

[3rdnlng]

Furthermore, all of you that have claimed that the Senate passed some bill 100-0 are fullofshit and are either stupid as hell or just flat out disingenuous. It was a voice vote about a cr.

[oldmanfan]

8 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

You say you are for walls but blame Trump for fighting for them. It's Trump's fault for the shutdown but not Pelosi's fault for refusing to negotiate? You're crusading.

 

8 minutes ago, GG said:

 

Let's try this again. 

 

You explicitly said that the shutdown is responsibility of one man who's refused to sign "bills" that were passed by both chambers.   Yet, there was no bill that's crossed his desk. 

 

Wouldn't that also make other people responsible?

Trump is the only person who can reopen government.  All he has to do is agree to sign the bill the House sent to the senate, the one that the Senate agreed to by a vote of 100-0 in December.  If he says he'd sign it McConnell would bring it to the floor right now.  Don't be disingenouous.

11 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

I stopped reading after you said words matter and over action.

 

This explains a lot of why your side and buddies on the left are losing. The NPC. Words matter. Yep, calling yourself a tranny because you wanna tuck when you got a schlong works for you.  Calling yourself an American when you're against free speech works for you, oddly ironic because... Words over action and most importantly words over action.

 

Jesus, it's like you're so unhinged you have no critical thinking ability or insight to look introspectively. Feeble af, brah

Several others here make good points and are worth having a discussion with.  You, on the other hand, bring up bizarre references to transsexuals and such make it clear you have no sense, since that has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

6 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Furthermore, all of you that have claimed that the Senate passed some bill 100-0 are fullofshit and are either stupid as hell or just flat out disingenuous. It was a voice vote about a cr.

Then bring it up for an actual vote.  How about the Senate actually do its job.

12 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

You say you are for walls but blame Trump for fighting for them. It's Trump's fault for the shutdown but not Pelosi's fault for refusing to negotiate? You're crusading.

I am blaming Trump for shutting down government over it.  Not blaming exactly, since he is the one who said he'd be proud to do so.  Just that he needs to own it.

[oldmanfan]

10 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Lost in the twin hoaxes of Buzzfeed and Big Chief Lie A Lot is the collapse of the House Dems plan to resist funding a border wall.

 

Pelosi doesn’t have the votes to win her opposition to border security.

I’m guessing the Trump plan could garner as much as 30 democrats, if presented, as is.

 

Steny Hoyer’s appearance on Cavuto signaled that the moderates are getting ready to jump ship.

Throw in Colin PetersonD-MN, and Elaine LuriaD-VA calls for a vote and the ‘resistance’ in the democrat house seems to be growing.

 

In theory she can block the vote, but even the Dems advising her to submit her own plan know she lacks popular support to produce one. The longer she goes without allowing efforts at a deal, the faster her power erodes. Pelosi is hoping Schumer can buy her time, but that time is just bleeding her support, further.

 

 

If Trump says he will sign the bill sent from the House to the Senate today government opens today.  That simple.

[GG]

4 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

 

Trump is the only person who can reopen government.  All he has to do is agree to sign the bill the House sent to the senate, the one that the Senate agreed to by a vote of 100-0 in December.  If he says he'd sign it McConnell would bring it to the floor right now.  Don't be disingenouous.

Several others here make good points and are worth having a discussion with.  You, on the other hand, bring up bizarre references to transsexuals and such make it clear you have no sense, since that has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

Then bring it up for an actual vote.  How about the Senate actually do its job.

 

Nancy Pelosi has the same power by agreeing to the wall funding and getting a bill through the House, then on to the Senate and finally to the White House.

 

Don't be disingenuous.  

[oldmanfan]

11 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Lost in the twin hoaxes of Buzzfeed and Big Chief Lie A Lot is the collapse of the House Dems plan to resist funding a border wall.

 

Pelosi doesn’t have the votes to win her opposition to border security.

I’m guessing the Trump plan could garner as much as 30 democrats, if presented, as is.

 

Steny Hoyer’s appearance on Cavuto signaled that the moderates are getting ready to jump ship.

Throw in Colin PetersonD-MN, and Elaine LuriaD-VA calls for a vote and the ‘resistance’ in the democrat house seems to be growing.

 

In theory she can block the vote, but even the Dems advising her to submit her own plan know she lacks popular support to produce one. The longer she goes without allowing efforts at a deal, the faster her power erodes. Pelosi is hoping Schumer can buy her time, but that time is just bleeding her support, further.

 

 

I agree the Dems in the House are going to start feeling the heat as well.  Pelosi should never have said no funding for any wall, as her own folks have voted in the past for barriers along the border.  That was stupid of her to say, especially the part about it being immoral. 

Just now, GG said:

 

Nancy Pelosi has the same power by agreeing to the wall funding and getting a bill through the House, then on to the Senate and finally to the White House.

 

Don't be disingenuous.  

Her position is that if you do that then you are basically saying that any Chief Executive should just shut down government if he or she doesn't get their at on a budgetary issue.  I agree with her on that.  It would be a horrible precedent.   And she doesn't have sole power, as it would depend on the House and Senate agreeing with that bill.  Unlike the President, who has sole power.  Nice try though.

[boyst]

12 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

 

Trump is the only person who can reopen government.  All he has to do is agree to sign the bill the House sent to the senate, the one that the Senate agreed to by a vote of 100-0 in December.  If he says he'd sign it McConnell would bring it to the floor right now.  Don't be disingenouous.

Several others here make good points and are worth having a discussion with.  You, on the other hand, bring up bizarre references to transsexuals and such make it clear you have no sense, since that has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

Then bring it up for an actual vote.  How about the Senate actually do its job.

I am blaming Trump for shutting down government over it.  Not blaming exactly, since he is the one who said he'd be proud to do so.  Just that he needs to own it.

It makes it fun for me. and since you're not honest enough to have a conversation with them might as well enjoy myself. It's like the Lakers playing the local community college team I'm dunking all over you and my balls are dancing all over your chin.literally I'm just clowning and making fun of you and you keep replying. I'll let the others make actual efforts, which are wasted because you're too stupid and intellectually dishonest

[GG]

6 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I agree the Dems in the House are going to start feeling the heat as well.  Pelosi should never have said no funding for any wall, as her own folks have voted in the past for barriers along the border.  That was stupid of her to say, especially the part about it being immoral. 

Her position is that if you do that then you are basically saying that any Chief Executive should just shut down government if he or she doesn't get their at on a budgetary issue.  I agree with her on that.  It would be a horrible precedent.   And she doesn't have sole power, as it would depend on the House and Senate agreeing with that bill.  Unlike the President, who has sole power.  Nice try though.

 

Are you saying that Trump is the first POTUS to ever threaten to use his Constitutionally given veto power?  The horrible precedent is to exercise fully vested powers?

[boyst]

8 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I agree the Dems in the House are going to start feeling the heat as well.  Pelosi should never have said no funding for any wall, as her own folks have voted in the past for barriers along the border.  That was stupid of her to say, especially the part about it being immoral. 

Her position is that if you do that then you are basically saying that any Chief Executive should just shut down government if he or she doesn't get their at on a budgetary issue.  I agree with her on that.  It would be a horrible precedent.   And she doesn't have sole power, as it would depend on the House and Senate agreeing with that bill.  Unlike the President, who has sole power.  Nice try though.

So why should she is just one individual representing a very small fraction of this country be able to shut down the entire country?

Why should a woman who represents just a trace amount of this country be able to do this to the entire population in all these federal workers who aren't getting paid? Why did she spearhead the vote against paying these workers when it was brought in front of them recently? She could have backed the bill to pay them until the government reopens but instead she wanted to make those families hurt for a political show. 

 

if you're going to respond, I do appreciate that you made nice sentences and use all the etiquetteid of proper grammar. But you'd be more impressive to actually display thought intellect and rational logic. Challenge yourself to be more than a retard

[3rdnlng]

5 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I agree the Dems in the House are going to start feeling the heat as well.  Pelosi should never have said no funding for any wall, as her own folks have voted in the past for barriers along the border.  That was stupid of her to say, especially the part about it being immoral. 

Her position is that if you do that then you are basically saying that any Chief Executive should just shut down government if he or she doesn't get their at on a budgetary issue.  I agree with her on that.  It would be a horrible precedent.   And she doesn't have sole power, as it would depend on the House and Senate agreeing with that bill.  Unlike the President, who has sole power.  Nice try though.

Every ***** shutdown that we've ever had has been a disagreement amongst parties. Were they precedents?

 

Listen, Nancy Pelosi had to satisfy the far left of her party in order to get the votes for Speaker. That is why she said no to the wall. She now has a hard time taking that back but does have a four year agreement preventing her party from throwing her out. She put herself in this spot and has to find a way out.

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, GG said:

 

Are you saying that Trump is the first POTUS to ever threaten to use his Constitutionally given veto power?  The horrible precedent is to exercise fully vested powers?

Right now the president has sole power in that if he accepted the House bill that he said he would in December, and then reneged, this would be over.  I am saying that the constitutional process should be followed.  The House sent the same bill to the Senate that they passed overwhelmingly in December (yes, by voice vote).  The Senate should do its constitutional job and vote on it.  Assuming a similar result as in December (because if they then went back on it that would be the height of hypocrisy) then it goes to the president.  If he wants to veto, he should.  That is his constitutional right and duty.  Then the Congress can vote to override or not.  And if the citizens don't like the results of that they can respond with their votes in 2020.

 

Let government operate the way it is supposed to operate an stop playing games.  If you set a precedent where a president can simply stop government because he doesn't like an appropriation we will have chaos.

[boyst]

2 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Every ***** shutdown that we've ever had has been a disagreement amongst parties. Were they precedents?

 

Listen, Nancy Pelosi had to satisfy the far left of her party in order to get the votes for Speaker. That is why she said no to the wall. She now has a hard time taking that back but does have a four year agreement preventing her party from throwing her out. She put herself in this spot and has to find a way out.

@oldmanfan

Also needs to realize: Pelosi had to also change govern to make sure she could not be easily tossed aside when it was realized she was an ineffective leader.

 

Further, the legislature can override Trump on this should they choose.  If you passed 3rd grade you'd know this. 

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Every ***** shutdown that we've ever had has been a disagreement amongst parties. Were they precedents?

 

Listen, Nancy Pelosi had to satisfy the far left of her party in order to get the votes for Speaker. That is why she said no to the wall. She now has a hard time taking that back but does have a four year agreement preventing her party from throwing her out. She put herself in this spot and has to find a way out.

And the president put himself in his position on live TV and he has to figure a way out.

[boyst]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

Right now the president has sole power in that if he accepted the House bill that he said he would in December, and then reneged, this would be over.  I am saying that the constitutional process should be followed.  The House sent the same bill to the Senate that they passed overwhelmingly in December (yes, by voice vote).  The Senate should do its constitutional job and vote on it.  Assuming a similar result as in December (because if they then went back on it that would be the height of hypocrisy) then it goes to the president.  If he wants to veto, he should.  That is his constitutional right and duty.  Then the Congress can vote to override or not.  And if the citizens don't like the results of that they can respond with their votes in 2020.

 

Let government operate the way it is supposed to operate an stop playing games.  If you set a precedent where a president can simply stop government because he doesn't like an appropriation we will have chaos.

The Constitution provides executives the right to veto and reject. It also provides the opportunity to override a veto.  

 

You're arguing in such a circle that you're arguing with yourself in some shittastic opportunity of such ill presented logic that you're not disagreeing with anyone so much as showing yourself to be a fool.

[oldmanfan]

9 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

It makes it fun for me. and since you're not honest enough to have a conversation with them might as well enjoy myself. It's like the Lakers playing the local community college team I'm dunking all over you and my balls are dancing all over your chin.literally I'm just clowning and making fun of you and you keep replying. I'll let the others make actual efforts, which are wasted because you're too stupid and intellectually dishonest

I am not going to respond to your childish rhetoric anymore.  You want to have an adult conversation, act like an adult.

[boyst]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

And the president put himself in his position on live TV and he has to figure a way out.

He does?  Why?  What changed?  You really think the America public is holding a petulant immature braggadocios #orangemanbad for what he runs off at the mouth with for the 1,267,720th time?  No, because everyone sees that despite his big mouth he is airing out for all to see the hypocrisy and desire to destroy America by the left.

 

This is why the left is getting their ass kicked every day since 2015.  They're too stupid to look at themselves and too busy attacking the other side.  

 

Best you can do is go in your closet and get one of your summers eves and send it to your rep so they can begin to fix the Democratic party inside out.

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, Boyst62 said:

The Constitution provides executives the right to veto and reject. It also provides the opportunity to override a veto.  

 

You're arguing in such a circle that you're arguing with yourself in some shittastic opportunity of such ill presented logic that you're not disagreeing with anyone so much as showing yourself to be a fool.

I just said the exact same thing above, so why you are arguing makes no sense.  The president said he'd be proud to shut the government down.  He owns it.  The constitutional process is not being followed.  That is the problem.

[oldmanfan]

Just now, Boyst62 said:

He does?  Why?  What changed?  You really think the America public is holding a petulant immature braggadocios #orangemanbad for what he runs off at the mouth with for the 1,267,720th time?  No, because everyone sees that despite his big mouth he is airing out for all to see the hypocrisy and desire to destroy America by the left.

 

This is why the left is getting their ass kicked every day since 2015.  They're too stupid to look at themselves and too busy attacking the other side.  

 

Best you can do is go in your closet and get one of your summers eves and send it to your rep so they can begin to fix the Democratic party inside out.

More childish insults.  Do I think the public holds the president accountable?  Yes. 

 

I am independent, hate things about both sides.  But to say the left is getting their ass kicked since 2015  when they just had a huge victory in the House election is just stupid.

[boyst]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I am not going to respond to your childish rhetoric anymore.  You want to have an adult conversation, act like an adult.

You're not even having a conversation with those having a conversation with you. It's hyperbolic. Your own message is a echo chamber of rhetorical nature spinning itself in circles every other reply.

 

That GG, a far greater mind than you and many others here, has taken time to give to you is incredible. His message is much more tactful but he's also a lot nicer and more polite of a person than I am with 10 times the patience.

[3rdnlng]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

And the president put himself in his position on live TV and he has to figure a way out.

Except sentiment is growing for the President's position. Nancy is losing by the hour and Trump is being seen as the reasonable one here. In fact, Trump has already figured a way out and his proposal is just that.

[boyst]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

More childish insults.  Do I think the public holds the president accountable?  Yes. 

 

I am independent, hate things about both sides.  But to say the left is getting their ass kicked since 2015  when they just had a huge victory in the House election is just stupid.

You're standing in the middle of the highway with your superiority and virtue getting side swiped by every passing opportunity to make an informed decision.  Independents are morons.

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Except sentiment is growing for the President's position. Nancy is losing by the hour and Trump is being seen as the reasonable one here. In fact, Trump has already figured a way out and his proposal is just that.

That is a risk for Pelosi.  As I said earlier I hope every one in government right now gets voted out of office as soon as possible.  We deserve better than what we're getting.

[3rdnlng]

5 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I just said the exact same thing above, so why you are arguing makes no sense.  The president said he'd be proud to shut the government down.  He owns it.  The constitutional process is not being followed.  That is the problem.

That's not what he said but you know that. It was pointed out to you earlier in this thread but you continue to use wording that is not precise. He said he'd take the blame for a shutdown, not that he would be proud to shut the government down.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

Right now there is only one person who has the authority to open government; the chief executive.  

 

38 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

 

Trump is the only person who can reopen government.  

 

This is factually incorrect. Congress does not need POTUS to pass a budget at all. 

 

So, there are more than one person who has the authority to reopen the government. Making this position you're taking incorrect.