Trump and his cabinet/buffoonery- Get your bunkers ready!

[LadySkinsFan]

Trump's tactics may work when he's trying to license his name.

 

It doesn't work in government. 

 

 

[Larry]

29 minutes ago, visionary said:

My argument is pretty simple.  Your blame is misplaced and inaccurate.  Also there is no fillibuster going on.

 

The reason why it took 60 votes to pass is . . . ?  

 

Here, I'll make it easy for you.  

 

Link to the roll call vote of the cloture motion.  (Cloture is the vote to end a filibuster.  It takes 60 votes to pass.)  

 

Vote to end the filibuster, by Party:  (From NYT, since Senate.gov doesn't break down votes by Party)  

 

    Yes  No  NV
R    45   5   1
D     5  44
Tot  50  49   1

 

So, please, feel free to tell me again that my blaming the Dems for successfully filibustering the CR bill is "misplaced and inaccurate"  

 

Only next time, bring a fact to the table.  

 

 

 

 

 

[No Excuses]

This is the inevitable outcome of right wing extremists coming into power. This is the end game of politics that made compromise dirty. labeled people who don’t follow the herd RINOs and labeled all criticism as fake news. 

[Fresh8686]

11 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

The reason why it took 60 votes to pass is . . . ?  

 

 

Does your opinion on the democrats at all change, when you see they were willing to vote for a 3 day CR and the GOP denied it?

 

What I'm seeing is the republicans refusing to allow daca on a bill even though they ostensibly say they would vote for it. Republicans only willing to agree to a CR that extends beyond the state of the union, and a President who said no to a wall concession from schumer because saying yes to daca would enflame his base. 

 

When you look look at the history and the merits, I don't see how anyone places the primary blame on the democrats. To do so would be to arrest the person who calls the police on their abusive spouse, because they slapped them in self-defense, as they tried to beat them with a brick. 

 

In my opinion we have to consider the history, the merits, the credibility, and the orders of magnitude before we assign blame. 

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[visionary]

21 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

The reason why it took 60 votes to pass is . . . ?  

 

Here, I'll make it easy for you.  

 

Link to the roll call vote of the cloture motion.  (Cloture is the vote to end a filibuster.  It takes 60 votes to pass.)  

 

Vote to end the filibuster, by Party:  (From NYT, since Senate.gov doesn't break down votes by Party)  

 

    Yes  No  NV
R    45   5   1
D     5  44
Tot  50  49   1

 

So, please, feel free to tell me again that my blaming the Dems for successfully filibustering the CR bill is "misplaced and inaccurate"  

 

Only next time, bring a fact to the table.  

Was there an actual filibuster?  Or was there just debate by both parties?  Cloture is an end to debate...not necessarily filibuster.  I may be wrong on that (not really sure), but you're still oddly avoiding a lot of news that has come out about the various deals the Democrats and some Republicans sought but were rejected by Trump and the Republican leadership. It seems like you've been set on blaming the Democrats from the beginning for some reason, despite whatever information comes out saying otherwise. 

 

Also there's no need to be rude.

[Larry]

7 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:

 

Does your opinion on the democrats at all change, when you see they were willing to vote for a 3 day CR and the GOP denied it?

 

What I'm seeing is the republicans refusing to allow daca on a bill even though they ostensibly say they would vote for it.

 

Nope.  

 

It's a great argument that DACA is a good law, and should be passed.  

 

No, it does not justify holding the government hostage, to get it passed.  (And it absolutely does not make it "the other guy did it".)  

 

(I'm not trying to say that it is never justified to filibuster the funding for the government over some issue or another.  I can't think of a case where it would be justified, but I'm certain that it's possible.  I'm saying that this particular issue does not rise to that level of importance.)  

 

1 minute ago, visionary said:

Was there an actual filibuster?  Or was there just debate by both parties?  Cloture is an end to debate...not necessarily filibuster. 

 

But it takes 60 to end a filibuster.  

 

Otherwise, it takes 50.  (Well, more accurately, a plurality.)  

 

 

[Larry]

13 minutes ago, visionary said:

 

 

 

Larry's pie in the sky proposal?  A bill that does two things:  

 

1)  The government will continue functioning, at current spending levels, through the end of the fiscal year.  

 

2)  The spending bills ("the Budget") currently pending in the House, is now the budget for FY19.  

 

Yeah, it's a completely unbelievable fantasy.  So shoot me.  

[Dan T.]

In January 2017, Trump removed the temporary DACA protections implemented by Barack Obama.  In September 2017, he unilaterally rescinded DACA.  DACA recipients - remember, these people who were brought here as children by their non-status parents, are now facing deportation every day, even though, supposedly everybody - D and R - wants to give them some sort of path to legitimacy.  But despite efforts by Democrats to reach some sort of accord, they've been rebuffed by their Republican counterparts and by Trump.  In the meantime, up to 122 DACA people a day - those people everyone claims to want to help - lose their DACA protection and are subject to deportation by Jeff Sessions' Justice Department.  And on March 5, ALL DACA recipients lose.  Hardline Republicans don't care.  They seem to hold sway over efforts to reach some sort of accord.

 

That is why the Democrats are taking a stand now.

[visionary]

7 minutes ago, Larry said:

But it takes 60 to end a filibuster.  

 

Otherwise, it takes 50.  (Well, more accurately, a plurality.)  

I understand that, I guess I'm confused as to whether there was an official filibuster or just a back and forth debate and cloture was used to try to bypass the threat of a future filibuster.  

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

[LadySkinsFan]

More Trump delusional tweets.

 

Everybody knows the marches are anti-Trump administration.

[TheGreatBuzz]

17 minutes ago, visionary said:

I understand that, I guess I'm confused as to whether there was an official filibuster or just a back and forth debate and cloture was used to try to bypass the threat of a future filibuster.  

My understanding is that no one actually filibusters anymore.  All you do is say the word and it is treated as though you are doing it.

[Dan T.]

1 minute ago, LadySkinsFan said:

More Trump delusional tweets.

 

Everybody knows the marches are anti-Trump administration.

 

Let's see if he addresses them, like he did the Right to Life marchers yesterday. 

 

Chances of that are equal to the chances that Stormy Daniels is a virgin.

[Fresh8686]

40 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Nope.  

 

It's a great argument that DACA is a good law, and should be passed.  

 

No, it does not justify holding the government hostage, to get it passed.  (And it absolutely does not make it "the other guy did it".)  

 

(I'm not trying to say that it is never justified to filibuster the funding for the government over some issue or another.  I can't think of a case where it would be justified, but I'm certain that it's possible.  I'm saying that this particular issue does not rise to that level of importance.) 

 

I'd be very interested to hear an example of a justifiable case in your view if you ever think of one. 

 

I get where your coming from, but I disagree of course, for myriad reasons. There is the humanistic reason of stopping the very real trauma the dreamers are experiencing right now from politicians playing games with their lives. By the very requirements of the dreamer act, they have committed no crimes, been heavily vetted and are the epitome of mericratic principle. They literally earn every single day the right to be here with their good behavior. 

 

But, then there is the amount of money being lost every single time they do a CR rather than an actual budget. What causes the greater damage, an amount of time shutdown that leads to an eventual final resolution, or the accumulated waste of CR after CR? Especially given the fact that the democrats reportedly were throwing in a full year of funding for the military during negotiation with Trump. 

 

Then there is the question justice. What is the greater injustice that should be the primary point we stand against? Is it to stand against a racially motivated agenda? As a minority my answer might be different then yours. 

 

Im not saying I know how all these resolve, but the sum of these questions and more are what direct me to my position. 

[Fresh8686]

Man it's crazy watching McConnell and Schumer square off in this fight for control of the narrative. It's kind of like a rap battle or wrestling. Round after round, press conference after press conference. 

[bearrock]

26 minutes ago, visionary said:

I understand that, I guess I'm confused as to whether there was an official filibuster or just a back and forth debate and cloture was used to try to bypass the threat of a future filibuster.  

Cloture does not require an active ongoing filibuster.  In fact majority leader frequently calls for motion to proceed with an immediate vote for cloture.

 

One effect of cloture is that once cloture is invoked and passed, only germane amendments can be offered.  This would save the DACA opponents from a damaging vote where they would have to on the record vote against DACA.

 

With respect to Larry's position at large, I think it is a difficult question.  I agree by in large that shutting down a government by the minority can only be done under the gravest of circumstances.  Whether possible deportation and irrevocable harm to 800,000 people who clear majority wants to see rescued is a sufficient justification is a question that individuals will have to answer.

 

With that said, 5 GOP senators crossed the party divide to vote against cloture.  It's not as clear cut as one may think.

[spjunkies]

4 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:

Man it's crazy watching McConnell and Schumer square off in this fight for control of the narrative. It's kind of like a rap battle or wrestling. Round after round, press conference after press conference. 

 

They should have a budget on the pole match to settle things.

[RedskinsFan44]

2 hours ago, Larry said:

 

Did they pay in advance?

No idea, but I would think that would be a reservation kind of thing. If they didnt Trump is pissed because he lost money. And yeah, I'm sure its a "campaign fundraiser", but Mar-a-Lago gets a cut.

[Burgold]

7 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Remember, Whitewater. They found nothing, nothing at all.  All they could nail him on, was lying under oath about an affair.

Yep. And they have the nerve to complain about witch hunts. 

 

Exactly what did did shady real estate deals have to do with extra marital affairs?

[bearrock]

In some ways, GOP needs the cloture more than Democrats need the filibuster.

 

If McConnell moved to proceed without immediately moving for cloture, first thing Dems would do is offer Durbin-Graham DACA bill as an amendment.  GOP would look stupid filibustering, so they would have to vote on it and it may actually pass (49 dems plus Flake and Graham).

 

House will vote against it and now you have GOP killed CR because they are against a bipartisan compromise DACA solution.  Dems never needed the filibuster.  They just needed the opportunity to offer non germane amendment on CR.  Which is probably why it never got to filibuster to begin with.  There was never gonna be debate without cloture already in place.

[DogofWar1]

If DACA isn't saved now, it's gonna be dead.

 

Which has been the plan all along.  Don't pass CHIP so you can "force" Dems to choose between children and dreamers when the CR came up.  GOP can be "for the kids" and try to cast the Dems as opposed to it.

 

I understand the argument that Dems shouldn't block a CR because of DACA but that argument also has to accept that everyone under DACA will be 100% screwed if it isn't handled now.  Freedom Caucus will block anything DACA for the foreseeable future, and even if Dems retake everything in 2018, we would likely need a Dem president to pass it, which means likely no DACA replacement until 2021.

 

By then, I would expect almost all of the people who such a law could help would be deported.

 

I think people see what is happening though.  Most people know that the GOP played games with CHIP, so their sudden concern rings hollow and political.  Most people also realize that every time a deal gets close someone goes to Trump and blows it up.  This *should* be easy.  It's not because Trump keeps blowing it up.  People get that, and while sure, Dems could roll over and vote yes on some GOP wet dream, they shouldn't be blamed for not.  The political arsonists have played around long enough.

 

Honestly, the smart move by the GOP would have been to just fund CHIP in the past, even if only for another year or two, and leave DACA as the only major non-funding issue.  The "we should have an up or down vote on a clean CR" rhetoric, I think, plays better than "we should pass a CR with CHIP but not DACA."  It begs the question "okay, but why not DACA?"  GOP played themselves and now they want to blame Dems.  Nope.

[Going Commando]

13 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

I think people see what is happening though.  Most people know that the GOP played games with CHIP, so their sudden concern rings hollow and political. 

 

Most people have no idea about any of the details and all they will take away from this situation is that the Republicans control the government and couldn't keep the lights on.

 

That's why Republicans are going to deal with Democrats and send Trump something to sign and let him own a shutdown if he refuses.  A deal will probably take the form of a pledge to hold a vote on DACA sometime within the next month.  They'll get Trump to sign by promising money for some kind of wall.

 

They ****ed up this time by trying to involve Trump in the legislative process of the CR.  He dealt in bad faith and it submarined the whole thing.  So I expect Congress to take the lead on the CR and DACA legislation and force Trump to veto or sign.

[88Comrade2000]

6 hours ago, Larry said:

Anybody know where Trump is?  I think it would be amusing to observe. 

He has his one year anniversary- fundraising party at Mar- A- Lago; if he goes tonight. He was kind of upset the shutdown may interfere with that.

5 hours ago, Larry said:

 

1). No. It takes a majority vote to pass a spending bill. It takes 60 votes to end a filibuster  

 

2). And the claim was "the system was designed". I'm pretty sure the constitution doesn't mention 60 votes once. (Although I'm not sure. Does impeachment require 3/5 or 2/3?)

The Senate can change that. They can get rid of the filibuster if they want to or lower the threshold.  It was 67 votes at one time I think,

[88Comrade2000]

5 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

This is where I say the Left is kinda dumb (and GOP evil).  Who didn't see this one coming?  I said 6 months ago when CHIP expired that something like this would happen (didn't know it would be budget but just the GOP would use it tying it to something else and calling Left evil for not supporting).  While I don't agree with what the GOP does, they are certainly better at playing the game.

Off the top of my head, I would say this is roughly true.  There are a lot of factors that go into it though in my opinion.  Partly is money (for parts, etc).  But also is more complex aircraft which leads to a higher failure rate.  They also become more difficult to repair.  They have taken away the ability (and training) for Sailors to perform as in-depth repairs as we used to.  

People need to decide if we still want to be this.  Everyone loves to piss and moan about the defense budget (and there certainly is waste that needs to be fixed) but don't want to admit how expensive it is to be the "world police" or whatever term you wish to use.  You can't have it both ways.

Start charging the world or stop being the policeman of the world. This country is literally rotting from within. We can't be everywhere and we can't stop every major/minor conflict.

5 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said:

 

Thanks for this. I feel better now. 

If even one check were missed, the people who get checks would be in Washington so fast; berating their congress critters and maybe even beating them physically. You don't want to mess with the elderly.