Shutdown

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:08 am

Skinypupy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:46 pm
“Such an emergency that we’re going to make an announcement on a Saturday afternoon.”

During an NFL playoff game.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 9:06 am

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:08 am
Skinypupy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:46 pm
“Such an emergency that we’re going to make an announcement on a Saturday afternoon.”

During an NFL playoff game.

Both playoff games are on Sunday this week.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 9:19 am

During a college basketball game. Maybe they will celebrate with hamberders.

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 11:03 am

Trying to deflect attention from the Women’s March(es) today, maybe?

tjg_marantz · Post by **tjg_marantz** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 11:10 am

Skinypupy wrote:Trying to deflect attention from the Women’s March(es) today, maybe?

The women's marches should march on the women's march organizers.

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 12:57 pm

Sounds like he might be offering DACA protection in exchange for the wall.

Details: The offer is expected to include Trump’s $5.7 billion demand for wall money in exchange for the BRIDGE Act — which would extend protections for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) — and also legislation to extend the legal status of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders, according to a source with direct knowledge.

My memory's a little fuzzy, but isn't this the same thing Democrats offered last year in exchange for $25B in wall funding, and Trump turned it down?

While I still hate the idea of bargaining for a wall with people's lives, I'd lean towards taking that deal to stop the current bleeding. However, the fact it's "extend protections" and not "ensure protections" is certainly concerning. If there's a way it can be made that the GOP can't say "no backsies" whenever these extended protections expire, then that would be worth it, imo.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:05 pm

If this is the case, I'd imagine the distinctions will need to be teased out - is it funding to create STEEL SLATS or does "wall funding" go towards the maintenance/repair of existing structures? Does it address hiring of new agents or upgrades to technology (cameras, sensors, etc...)? If Trump is giving concessions to DACA but still mandating he needs his SLATS or beautiful concrete, I don't see anything changing.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:16 pm

tjg_marantz wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 11:10 am
Skinypupy wrote:Trying to deflect attention from the Women’s March(es) today, maybe?
The women's marches should march on the women's march organizers.

+1.

They might as well start a gofundme for the new wall women's march that falls short so they can keep the money

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:34 pm

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:05 pm If this is the case, I'd imagine the distinctions will need to be teased out - is it funding to create STEEL SLATS or does "wall funding" go towards the maintenance/repair of existing structures? Does it address hiring of new agents or upgrades to technology (cameras, sensors, etc...)? If Trump is giving concessions to DACA but still mandating he needs his SLATS or beautiful concrete, I don't see anything changing.

Guess I'd disagree. If Trump offers the same DACA protection Dems were willing to take in exchange for the wall last year (and do it at a fraction of the cost), it makes it much more difficult for Pelosi to say no. I would also suspect that public perception would shift pretty strongly in the GOP's direction when they point out that fact. (and yes, I realize they'll obfuscate it entirely with exaggerations and utter bullshit, but that's SOP at this point)

Anyone with a brain knows the wall won't actually accomplish anything (and likely won't ever be built, outside of some small sections), but giving that up in exchange for the security for hundreds of thousands of people? That's probably a deal I would take.

I'll admit I'm not exactly unbiased here. My next two months of paychecks have basically disappeared due to this lunacy, and I really need it to fucking stop. This seems like a reasonable compromise, when considering past positions on the issue.

GungHo · Post by **GungHo** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:57 pm

Skinypupy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:34 pm
Smoove_B wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:05 pm If this is the case, I'd imagine the distinctions will need to be teased out - is it funding to create STEEL SLATS or does "wall funding" go towards the maintenance/repair of existing structures? Does it address hiring of new agents or upgrades to technology (cameras, sensors, etc...)? If Trump is giving concessions to DACA but still mandating he needs his SLATS or beautiful concrete, I don't see anything changing.
Guess I'd disagree. If Trump offers the same DACA protection Dems were willing to take in exchange for the wall last year (and do it at a fraction of the cost), it makes it much more difficult for Pelosi to say no. I would also suspect that public perception would shift pretty strongly in the GOP's direction when they point out that fact. (and yes, I realize they'll obfuscate it entirely with exaggerations and utter bullshit, but that's SOP at this point)

Anyone with a brain knows the wall won't actually accomplish anything (and likely won't ever be built, outside of some small sections), but giving that up in exchange for the security for hundreds of thousands of people? That's probably a deal I would take.

I'll admit I'm not exactly unbiased here. My next two months of paychecks have basically disappeared due to this lunacy, and I really need it to fucking stop. This seems like a reasonable compromise, when considering past positions on the issue.

I see the logic in your position and in large part I agree my only concern is how trump then spins that to 'a win' and it improves his re-election chances in 20. It needs to be framed in a win -win narrative (at worst) in order for him to not capitalize. Because even the protection of hundreds of thousands of people in DACA pales in comparison with the need to protect hundreds of millions (if not billions) who would be harmed by another 4 years of trump.
We definitely need appropriations for more technology and manpower at the border however, not to mention more judges/courts.
Still a really sticky situation

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 2:08 pm

GungHo wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:57 pm my only concern is how trump then spins that to 'a win' and it improves his re-election chances in 20.

The Deplorables are gonna MAGA, regardless. I'm mostly just curious if anyone who isn't already firmly in that camp would really see it as a win, especially when it turns into the boondoggle that it inevitably wil.

Then again, I have no idea how to relate to anyone who is still "undecided" given the current body of evidence, so I really have no idea.

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 2:12 pm

GungHo wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:57 pm
Skinypupy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:34 pm
Smoove_B wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:05 pm If this is the case, I'd imagine the distinctions will need to be teased out - is it funding to create STEEL SLATS or does "wall funding" go towards the maintenance/repair of existing structures? Does it address hiring of new agents or upgrades to technology (cameras, sensors, etc...)? If Trump is giving concessions to DACA but still mandating he needs his SLATS or beautiful concrete, I don't see anything changing.
Guess I'd disagree. If Trump offers the same DACA protection Dems were willing to take in exchange for the wall last year (and do it at a fraction of the cost), it makes it much more difficult for Pelosi to say no. I would also suspect that public perception would shift pretty strongly in the GOP's direction when they point out that fact. (and yes, I realize they'll obfuscate it entirely with exaggerations and utter bullshit, but that's SOP at this point)

Anyone with a brain knows the wall won't actually accomplish anything (and likely won't ever be built, outside of some small sections), but giving that up in exchange for the security for hundreds of thousands of people? That's probably a deal I would take.

I'll admit I'm not exactly unbiased here. My next two months of paychecks have basically disappeared due to this lunacy, and I really need it to fucking stop. This seems like a reasonable compromise, when considering past positions on the issue.
I see the logic in your position and in large part I agree my only concern is how trump then spins that to 'a win' and it improves his re-election chances in 20. It needs to be framed in a win -win narrative (at worst) in order for him to not capitalize. Because even the protection of hundreds of thousands of people in DACA pales in comparison with the need to protect hundreds of millions (if not billions) who would be harmed by another 4 years of trump.
We definitely need appropriations for more technology and manpower at the border however, not to mention more judges/courts.
Still a really sticky situation

The other thing to remember is that he's not offering anything. DACA remains in place as the Supremes decided not to take up a review of the order leaving it in place .

GungHo · Post by **GungHo** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 2:33 pm

Skinypupy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 2:08 pm
GungHo wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:57 pm my only concern is how trump then spins that to 'a win' and it improves his re-election chances in 20.
The Deplorables are gonna MAGA, regardless. I'm mostly just curious if anyone who isn't already firmly in that camp would really see it as a win, especially when it turns into the boondoggle that it inevitably wil.

Then again, I have no idea how to relate to anyone who is still "undecided" given the current body of evidence, so I really have no idea.

Admittedly I have less than zero confidence in my fellow Americans to discriminate/discern such details, but I think any scenario in which trump is able to utter the words 'we're building the wall!' when accompanied by a bill that has passed congress with appropriations for 'border security'(no matter what those specifically are) is a boost to his 20 campaign. Which is why I think the democrats are sunk in this whole thing, no matter what happens. Bc trump will make that claim and fox will run it that way, and while CNN/MSNBC will probably tell it correctly, the 'fake news' idea has bloomed in too many mush-heads that they can ascribe pettiness about losing the fight to the liberal media. And to the millions of independents who don't have the time, energy, or inclination to dive deeper that will ring true. And while I generally believe individuals to be good, I generally believe people as a group suck. So there's that

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 2:40 pm

Let’s be honest, they’re going to run a victory lap no matter how this thing ends, facts be damned. This scenario just kinda feels like the least damaging way to allow the toddlers to celebrate while the adults get back to work.

Edit: This is all dependent on what the offer actually is, as Pyper pointed out. If they’re “offering” something that isn’t theirs to offer, then all deals are off. If they offer legit DACA protections that can’t be challenged or yanked away later (I’m not holding my breath), then that’s worth consideration, imo.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 3:26 pm

stessier wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 9:06 am
LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:08 am
Skinypupy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:46 pm
“Such an emergency that we’re going to make an announcement on a Saturday afternoon.”

During an NFL playoff game.
Both playoff games are on Sunday this week.

Just realized that as I scheduled my afternoon. I guess it's actually a huge viewing dead zone so we'll see. Might be an astute move depending on what he actually says.

But coverage will undoubtedly get gobbled up by tomorrow's games.

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 3:34 pm

Give me something new in exchange for extending something you already have. Fuck that, fuck him, fuck his wall.

The thing is, it's not just 5 billion dollars. We know the wall is going to cost WAY more than that when all is said and done. And nobody but Trump and his cronies wants it.

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:25 pm

Trump just claimed the wall in San Antonio is proof they work.

There is no wall in San Antonio.

"You look at different places they put up a wall, no problem. You look at San Antonio, you look at so many different places."

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:27 pm

YellowKing wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 3:34 pm We know the wall is going to cost WAY more than that when all is said and done. And nobody but Trump and his cronies wants it.

Worse, they only want it for the positive PR it will give them. It's possible that drumpf thinks it's a good idea. I give it a 50/50 chance with him. With everyone else, the wall is quite literally nothing but positive PR (with a minority of Americans).

Dems don't want it. Reps don't want it. Drumpf wants it because he promised it to his supporters who gobbled it up. McConnell sure as f**k doesn't want it. It's meaningless. It's the absolute worst form of government spending imaginable, and exactly what the "drain the swamp"/reduce government size people wanted stopped.

Every time I see something like this it reinforces my understanding of why Piggy died in Lord of the Flies.

Large groups of emotional humans are just about the scariest thing there is on Earth.

Sepiche · Post by **Sepiche** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:28 pm

The master negotiator at work.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:01 pm

Skinypupy wrote:Trump just claimed the wall in San Antonio is proof they work.

There is no wall in San Antonio.

"You look at different places they put up a wall, no problem. You look at San Antonio, you look at so many different places."

San Antonio is over 150 miles from the border. The bigger threat is invading Austinites.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 pm

Does he mean... the Alamo?

It's the Alamo, isn't it?

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:13 pm

I think my life would be complete if he somehow manages to make a reference to the basement in the Alamo.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:40 pm

As expected the "deal" was a heap of trash. Wall in return for a new temporary status for DACA and TPS folks. Which is essentially what they have now anyway. FWIW this is all a gimmick. McConnell has already announced he is going to push a vote on this "deal". These fuckers are playing the 'we are making concessions' game and try to flip this back to the Dems. And the national political media is almost certainly going to help them do it.

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:47 pm

Nancy's playing hardball.

Jeff V · Post by **Jeff V** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:53 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:01 pm
Skinypupy wrote:Trump just claimed the wall in San Antonio is proof they work.

There is no wall in San Antonio.

"You look at different places they put up a wall, no problem. You look at San Antonio, you look at so many different places."
San Antonio is over 150 miles from the border. The bigger threat is invading Austinites.

I'm sure he is remembering the Alamo and in his alt-fact universe the walls of the Alamo kept the defenders alive.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:27 pm

YellowKing wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:47 pm Nancy's playing hardball.

More info please.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:36 pm

The Hill

“Democrats were hopeful that the President was finally willing to re-open government and proceed with a much-need discussion to protect the border. Unfortunately, initial reports make clear that his proposal is a compilation of several previously rejected initiatives, each of which is unacceptable and in total, do not represent a good faith effort to restore certainty to people’s lives,” she said in a statement.

“It is unlikely that any one of these provisions alone would pass the House, and taken together, they are a non-starter.”
...
Pelosi slammed the deal for not including “the permanent solution for the Dreamers and TPS recipients that our country needs and supports.”
...
The House speaker included several border security measures her party would support, including increased infrastructure investments at ports of entry, advanced technology to detect drugs and other contraband and increased customs personnel and immigration judges.

“Next week, Democrats will pass a package of six bills agreed to by House and Senate negotiators and other legislation to re-open government so that we can fully negotiate on border security proposals. The President must sign these bills to re-open government immediately and stop holding the American people hostage with this senseless shutdown,” Pelosi said.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:39 pm

Skinypupy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:25 pm Trump just claimed the wall in San Antonio is proof they work.

There is no wall in San Antonio.

"You look at different places they put up a wall, no problem. You look at San Antonio, you look at so many different places."

Why would you put a wall in San Antonio? To stop the River Walk?

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:42 pm

Thanks Izzy.

That's less hardball and just ball imo. Which is fine. I don't necessarily want the two sides to start savaging each other.

geezer · Post by **geezer** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:45 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:01 pm
Skinypupy wrote:Trump just claimed the wall in San Antonio is proof they work.

There is no wall in San Antonio.

"You look at different places they put up a wall, no problem. You look at San Antonio, you look at so many different places."
San Antonio is over 150 miles from the border. The bigger threat is invading Austinites.

Nah. Our Bird scooters can only make it about 5 miles or so before they run out of juice.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:09 pm

LordMortis wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:39 pm
Skinypupy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:25 pm Trump just claimed the wall in San Antonio is proof they work.

There is no wall in San Antonio.

"You look at different places they put up a wall, no problem. You look at San Antonio, you look at so many different places."

Why would you put a wall in San Antonio? To stop the River Walk?

He's thinking of the Alamo. That wall didn't work out so well either.

GungHo · Post by **GungHo** » Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:08 am

Jaymann wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:09 pm
LordMortis wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:39 pm
Skinypupy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:25 pm Trump just claimed the wall in San Antonio is proof they work.

There is no wall in San Antonio.

"You look at different places they put up a wall, no problem. You look at San Antonio, you look at so many different places."

Why would you put a wall in San Antonio? To stop the River Walk?
He's thinking of the Alamo. That wall didn't work out so well either.

You can't stop the San Antonio River, you can only hope to contain it.

It bottles the mind (I'm guessing that's how trump would phrase it anyway).
Tho I suppose he could be saying we need walls bc 'look! The Mexicans are coming!'. He's only off by about 180 years or so which I think is probably within 1 standard deviation for trump when it comes to accuracy.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:50 am

malchior wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:40 pm As expected the "deal" was a heap of trash. Wall in return for a new temporary status for DACA and TPS folks. Which is essentially what they have now anyway. FWIW this is all a gimmick. McConnell has already announced he is going to push a vote on this "deal". These fuckers are playing the 'we are making concessions' game and try to flip this back to the Dems. And the national political media is almost certainly going to help them do it.

Ah there it is. Though to be fair the Times does have a separate piece with a fairly good analysis about how this came about and the reasons why it fell so flat. Essentially a battle between Kushner and Miller that watered the 'compromise' down and a Trump base that will not accept any compromise on immigration anyway.

em2nought · Post by **em2nought** » Sun Jan 20, 2019 12:59 pm

Jaymann wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:09 pm

He's thinking of the Alamo. That wall didn't work out so well either.
[/quote]

That wall seems to have helped make it work out pretty well for Texas.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:58 pm

em2nought wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 12:59 pm That wall seems to have helped make it work out pretty well for Texas.

Yup, it’s kept San Antonio safe since Trump had it built. He’s already accepting bids for the wall between Cincinnati and Juárez.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Sun Jan 20, 2019 9:02 pm

It's always nice to read in the news what you suspect is the truth

Ten words in faded red ink adorn the glass door of the federal building: "Please hold mail for duration of government shutdown. Thank you."

Here in this northern Colorado coal town, those 10 words, and the unplowed parking lot of that Bureau of Land Management facility, are among the few obvious signs that the nation's federal government is partially closed, resulting in nearly 1 million American workers not getting their taxpayer-paid paychecks.

Many of Craig's 9,000 residents are just fine with that.

...

"It kind of makes me question what they do on a day-to-day basis," says Paul James, 31, who runs the town's sole medical marijuana dispensary. "If I don't miss them, what were they doing?"

They should probably get rid of all of their EMTs, police, fire and public health officials too. Maybe add the DPW workers. If you can't see them actually doing something, they're probably just parasites, right?

Another big suprrise:

“The federal government is our biggest enemy out here," says Mayor John Ponikvar, who has owned a NAPA auto parts store here since 1995.

Speaking in his shop office, which is decorated with Republican presidential memorabilia, Ponikvar, 62, says many residents believe the federal government does far more harm than good, especially when it comes to the coal beneath the ground. It's a refrain repeated by the Sunday evening drinkers at J.W. Snack's Bar & Grill and the retired miners sipping morning coffee at The Other Place Sports Bar & Grill.

Once again, people that have likely long-enjoyed the benefits of living in America and hate everyone for it.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sun Jan 20, 2019 9:06 pm

People have short attention spans. If it’s not my problem right now, it’s not a problem.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Sun Jan 20, 2019 9:15 pm

I particularly enjoy the patriotism of crowing over the employment and paycheck challenges of fellow americans.

It's like everyone else deserves a job, except for those that do the country's work. Those people can suck it, because I love my country and hate everything everyone does to keep it operating.

You're an American employed by Americans to do America's work? Fuck you. I'm glad you're dead foreclosing on your house, asshole.

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Sun Jan 20, 2019 9:25 pm

As always, it doesn’t personally and immediately affect them, therefore it doesn’t matter.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Sun Jan 20, 2019 10:33 pm

Skinypupy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 9:25 pm As always, it doesn’t personally and immediately affect them, therefore it doesn’t matter.

What pisses me off is that that could be said for 99% of everyone's employment in the country. Meat packing plant? I wonder what they do up there. They've been closed for a month and nothing has changed. Why even bother keeping it open? Clearly an example of waste.

How stupid are people? Babies get object permanence at about 8-9 months of age. Does everyone lose it by the time they go through puberty? Wtf, it's takes an absolute minimum of thought to understand things that are outside of your immediate presence.

Fuck.