The Trump Shutdown

[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.