The Impending US Government Shutdown

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

NemotheElvenPanda:
Serious question, who's to blame for this, and why?

There is a very compelling argument that this is fundamentally Donald Trump's fault.

Trump caused the whole crisis by cancelling DACA in the first place, punting the issue to Congress, and then repeatedly flip-flopping on the possibility of a deal. His demands have never been consistent and his involvement in the process has been actively detrimental to negotiations. Y'know, he agrees to a deal, then two days later decides he doesn't agree to it anymore, and then he starts insulting the people he's trying to cut a deal with on Twitter. It's a mess. For a guy who advertised his ability to cut deals, he is actually pretty terrible at making deals.

The basic problem right now is that no-one is confident putting forward any deal that the President won't sign, and Donald Trump has been confusing and inconsistent about what kind of deal he'd be willing to sign. He simply cannot be trusted.

Naturally, the White House has come out in ranks to exculpate the President, with Mick Mulvaney insisting with a straight face that "there's no way you can lay this at the feet of the President."

Seanchaidh:
No, it's not impossible to predict at all. Polls have been done: 28% would blame Democrats, 48% would blame Republicans.

The spin machine is already in motion, man. Most people didn't even seem to be aware that a government shutdown was looming because it got drowned out by the "shithole" comment. Now that it's real and happening, everyone's PR department is going to be out in force to play the blame game.

I guarantee those numbers will change as the shutdown goes on. I can't say in whose favour, though. I can only hope it's against the Republicans.

Seanchaidh:
The Democrats should protect CHIP and DACA and not give an inch. Those are the terms, take it or leave it. If GOP wants a budget, it includes both of those. If the GOP want to defy the American people, that's on them. The Democrats should demand nothing less than total capitulation by the GOP.

I agree, if only because DACA and CHIP are such no-brainers that they shouldn't represent an obstacle of any kind in any sane universe.

I mean, one protects members of highly-skilled, productive, low-crime demographic from being deported for something their parents did when they were children. The other literally keeps sick children alive. They are both good policies, they won't cost the government anything, and the Lindsey-Graham deal would've given Trump a billion dollars to play cops and robbers with on the border. There's no sound policy reason to reject it; it's happening purely because Trump has no idea what he wants and Republicans don't care enough about the topic to seize the reins from him.

If anyone's wondering what CHIP is and what the deal with it is, there's a long explanation that I didn't want to include in the OP for reasons of length:

Seanchaidh:
There is no legitimate reason to compromise with people who want to ignore what the American people have to say. The American people want both DACA and CHIP to be funded. The GOP, if they don't want to do both of those things, should fuck off.

I'm not saying that it's not a good thing to hold out. I'm saying that people need to take responsibility for their actions, and acknowledge the consequences. The Democrats need to stand up and say "yes, we are partially responsible for this shut down, we regret any pain caused as a result, but we believe this is necessary for X". Rather than purely attempting to blame the Republicans. That said, as noted, X does involve the Republicans not giving the promised deal.

NemotheElvenPanda:
Serious question, who's to blame for this, and why?

According to Trump, the President.
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/01/19/trump-government-shutdown-blame-sot-2013-fox-lead.cnn

Trump wanted a shutdown. Jesus Christ, how many times does he have to say it before people start to catch on? His supporters are so comically stupid.

I hate British politics with a burning passion. But at least it's not as bad as American politics.

Catnip1024:
That said, as noted, X does involve the Republicans not giving the promised deal.

So why exactly are the Democrats responsible for Trump breaking his word?

BeetleManiac:
So why exactly are the Democrats responsible for Trump breaking his word?

That's not what I said. The Democrats are partially responsible for the government shutdown. A government shutdown causes pain, at the very least to the workers on forced leave. Rather than attempting to wash their hands of it completely, the Democrats should be accepting that they are partially responsible, and justifying the balance of the pain caused here against the benefit of whatever concessions they get.

Trump's an idiot, and has by the sounds of it completely mismanaged this. He has the primary responsibility here. The wider Republican members also have blame for the amount of infighting amongst themselves. But at the end of the day, every member of that vote contributing to the shutdown is partially responsible for any pain caused as a result.

Catnip1024:
But at the end of the day, every member of that vote contributing to the shutdown is partially responsible for any pain caused as a result.

But there was a deal on the table. The Democrats had negotiated a solution and compromise that they could live with. They're not the ones who torpedoed this.

BeetleManiac:
But there was a deal on the table. The Democrats had negotiated a solution and compromise that they could live with. They're not the ones who torpedoed this.

But as Catnip keeps saying, they're the ones pushing the "Shutdown Government" button. They may well be justified in pushing it as the lesser of two evils, but that's different than claiming that somebody else pushed it.

Veylon:

BeetleManiac:
But there was a deal on the table. The Democrats had negotiated a solution and compromise that they could live with. They're not the ones who torpedoed this.

But as Catnip keeps saying, they're the ones pushing the "Shutdown Government" button. They may well be justified in pushing it as the lesser of two evils, but that's different than claiming that somebody else pushed it.

Not really? If the democrats presented a plan and the republicans refused to take it, the republicans are responsible for the results of not agreeing to that plan. Republican actions led to the shutdown, just like last time.

All this blaming the democrats reeks of "it's the liberals fault because they didn't massage the conservatives balls enough while sucking their cock. They are 100% at fault for being bad at ball play."

It's not the democrats fault the republicans are incompetent and walked into the room with no intention on compromise.

Veylon:

But as Catnip keeps saying, they're the ones pushing the "Shutdown Government" button. They may well be justified in pushing it as the lesser of two evils, but that's different than claiming that somebody else pushed it.

That's incredibly poor reasoning. Given that in cases like these one should judge prior acts, and then if discord emerges, utilitarian reasoning. Ending DACA and CHIP is bad for the country on fiscal grounds. In no uncertain terms. Not only did Republicans break their promise, but they're arguing from a position that neither has the backing of the American people, nor the backing of economic determinism.

In essence there was an accord in place, there is solid economic reasons not to break that, and you don't blame someone coming to a table and bearing reasonable expectations when their counterpart flips the table and yells gibberish, demanding the unexpected.

It goes against any basic designs of principled and enlightened leadership.

Veylon:
But as Catnip keeps saying, they're the ones pushing the "Shutdown Government" button. They may well be justified in pushing it as the lesser of two evils, but that's different than claiming that somebody else pushed it.

But there was a deal and the Trump after saying he would sign it changed his mind and refused to sign it. What exactly are the Democrats at fault for in that equation?

undeadsuitor:

Veylon:

BeetleManiac:
But there was a deal on the table. The Democrats had negotiated a solution and compromise that they could live with. They're not the ones who torpedoed this.

But as Catnip keeps saying, they're the ones pushing the "Shutdown Government" button. They may well be justified in pushing it as the lesser of two evils, but that's different than claiming that somebody else pushed it.

Not really? If the democrats presented a plan and the republicans refused to take it, the republicans are responsible for the results of not agreeing to that plan. Republican actions led to the shutdown, just like last time.

All this blaming the democrats reeks of "it's the liberals fault because they didn't massage the conservatives balls enough while sucking their cock. They are 100% at fault for being bad at ball play."

It's not the democrats fault the republicans are incompetent and walked into the room with no intention on compromise.

It's even worse than that...

Democrats AND Republicans[1] presented a plan that had bi-partisan approval until Republicans then decided to back away from it for still undefined reasons.

[1] Sen. Durbin(D) and Sen. Graham(R)

Their reasons are perfectly defined for everyone who knows what's going on. Republicans are not interesting in governing. They are not interested in doing what they were elected to do by the people. They're interested in destroying the government and giving away the entire country to corporate interests.

Relevant:
It's Not a Government Shutdown.
It's a Right-Wing Coup.

At the height of the 2013 (manufactured) crisis, the DOJ and NSA used the "shutdown" to justify delaying work on civil-rights cases and post-Snowden reforms. When "property" is at stake, boutique, trivial concerns like combating racism and civil liberties are apparently expendable, while the urgent needs of the deep state and police state chug along. A breakdown of what was "shut down" by The Washington Post at the time put it best: "Although agencies like the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Agency will continue their operations, the Justice Department will suspend many civil cases for as long as the government is shut down."

"Necessary" government function apparently means that which protects the interests of the capitalists.

I'm also cannot see how 'both sides' applies to this at all. The Republicans have been withholding CHIP funding to use as a bargaining tool. When they did bring it to the table as part of the budget bill, the Democrats worked with Republicans and made a deal acceptable to both parties and were told the President would sign it.

And the that fucking orange muppet flipped and said no deal, cause you know, he's the master deal maker. If I were to hazard a guess, some loudmouth on Fox news probably said something nasty about the deal and that moron felt his precious little ego bruised. This is Trump's fault through and through, and I hope the American populace at large can recognise that.

I'm interested to see how this will play out a decade or so from now, as it seems the idea of learning past mistakes is to America as object permanence is to toddlers ie: whether or not we'll elect another band of staggeringly incompetent fuckwits or just plain terrible people to run the government into the ground while we funnel another few hundred billion to the military and the wealthy.

Veylon:

BeetleManiac:
But there was a deal on the table. The Democrats had negotiated a solution and compromise that they could live with. They're not the ones who torpedoed this.

But as Catnip keeps saying, they're the ones pushing the "Shutdown Government" button. They may well be justified in pushing it as the lesser of two evils, but that's different than claiming that somebody else pushed it.

5 Democrats voted to keep the government running while 4 Republicans backed the rest of the Dems in shutting it down.

Or to put the numbers another way: the republicans didn't have the votes amongst themselves to keep the government running.

Catnip1024:

BeetleManiac:
So why exactly are the Democrats responsible for Trump breaking his word?

That's not what I said. The Democrats are partially responsible for the government shutdown. A government shutdown causes pain, at the very least to the workers on forced leave. Rather than attempting to wash their hands of it completely, the Democrats should be accepting that they are partially responsible, and justifying the balance of the pain caused here against the benefit of whatever concessions they get.

Trump's an idiot, and has by the sounds of it completely mismanaged this. He has the primary responsibility here. The wider Republican members also have blame for the amount of infighting amongst themselves. But at the end of the day, every member of that vote contributing to the shutdown is partially responsible for any pain caused as a result.

If the Republicans voted party line, they had just enough Dem support to keep the government running.

They didn't even have that amongst their own ranks, and now they're offering a trolly problem with CHIP and DACA tied to the tracks. Two issues they've had months to address and which shouldn't be tied to the budget, but they used that time to push through hookers and cocaine for big business.

But sure, what we should focus on right is how much blame the democrats should get for not capitulating completely.

Catnip1024:

Seanchaidh:
There is no legitimate reason to compromise with people who want to ignore what the American people have to say. The American people want both DACA and CHIP to be funded. The GOP, if they don't want to do both of those things, should fuck off.

I'm not saying that it's not a good thing to hold out. I'm saying that people need to take responsibility for their actions, and acknowledge the consequences. The Democrats need to stand up and say "yes, we are partially responsible for this shut down, we regret any pain caused as a result, but we believe this is necessary for X". Rather than purely attempting to blame the Republicans. That said, as noted, X does involve the Republicans not giving the promised deal.

Why in god's name should the Democrats give the GOP an inch while the GOP is doing everything in its power to pin the blame solely on the Dems?

Do you seriously not know how this works by now?

And the White House is officially blaming the government shutdown on Democrats. To quote the current outgoing message for the White House:

"Thank you for calling the White House. Unfortunately, we cannot answer your call today. Congressional Democrats are holding government funding, including funding for our troops and other national security priorities, hostage to an unrelated immigration debate. Due to this obstruction, the government is shut down. In the meantime, you can leave a comment at http://www.whitehouse.gov, forward slash contact. We look forward to taking your calls as soon as the government reopens."

I mean...WOW.

Source: GZ.com, David Mack, et. al.

altnameJag:
If the Republicans voted party line, they had just enough Dem support to keep the government running.

They didn't even have that amongst their own ranks, and now they're offering a trolly problem with CHIP and DACA tied to the tracks. Two issues they've had months to address and which shouldn't be tied to the budget, but they used that time to push through hookers and cocaine for big business.

But sure, what we should focus on right is how much blame the democrats should get for not capitulating completely.

No, my original point was that we shouldn't be aiming at the blame game so much as what it takes to fix things. And that a shutdown causes pain, and that if you voted for the shutdown, regardless of party allegiance, you have to accept that you are contributing to that pain and justify why the benefits outweigh that. And, in response to the original suggestion that the Democrats should aim to drag it out - that the longer you wait, the more likely the Republicans are to get their house in order and not need you.

Why in god's name should the Democrats give the GOP an inch while the GOP is doing everything in its power to pin the blame solely on the Dems?

Do you seriously not know how this works by now?

Because if you have a temporary position of power and fail to use it, you lose it. Sure, get some compromise. But you wait too long, the chance is gone.

Catnip1024:

altnameJag:
If the Republicans voted party line, they had just enough Dem support to keep the government running.

They didn't even have that amongst their own ranks, and now they're offering a trolly problem with CHIP and DACA tied to the tracks. Two issues they've had months to address and which shouldn't be tied to the budget, but they used that time to push through hookers and cocaine for big business.

But sure, what we should focus on right is how much blame the democrats should get for not capitulating completely.

No, my original point was that we shouldn't be aiming at the blame game so much as what it takes to fix things. And that a shutdown causes pain, and that if you voted for the shutdown, regardless of party allegiance, you have to accept that you are contributing to that pain and justify why the benefits outweigh that. And, in response to the original suggestion that the Democrats should aim to drag it out - that the longer you wait, the more likely the Republicans are to get their house in order and not need you.

Why in god's name should the Democrats give the GOP an inch while the GOP is doing everything in its power to pin the blame solely on the Dems?

Do you seriously not know how this works by now?

Because if you have a temporary position of power and fail to use it, you lose it. Sure, get some compromise. But you wait too long, the chance is gone.

Which they did. Avnger already pointed that out

Avnger:

Democrats AND Republicans Sen. Durbin(D) and Sen. Graham(R) presented a plan that had bi-partisan approval until Republicans then decided to back away from it for still undefined reasons.

So it was either capitulate and get nothing or say they weren't going to get pushed around any more.

The efforts made by the democrats and some brave Republicans who attempted to reach and accord and the other republicans who just said no without giving an inch will be seen in the future.

Catnip1024:
No, my original point was that we shouldn't be aiming at the blame game so much as what it takes to fix things. And that a shutdown causes pain, and that if you voted for the shutdown, regardless of party allegiance, you have to accept that you are contributing to that pain and justify why the benefits outweigh that.

A pretty hefty benefit in this case would have to do with bargaining position, and more specifically how any bargaining position becomes worthless the moment you show you're going to give them what they want anyway. The entire reason DACA and CHIP are effective bargaining chips in GOP hands is because there's really no doubt that the Republicans will absolutely let the funding on children's health insurance run dry if they don't get what they want. Right now, pretty much the only thing the Democrats have in terms of leverage is the ability to cockblock things that the Republicans flat-out need them for, and should the Democrats demonstrate that they will still pass bills, even if only crucial ones, without any GOP concessions, then the GOP suddenly finds a big pile of motivation to never, ever concede.

Or to put it another way. Let's say the Democrats agree to an unconditional one month extension, to keep the government running while they work on hammering out a deal. That month comes and goes, the Republicans just... stonewall. Concede nothing. No DACA, no CHIP, fuck you Democrats. Let the government shut down a second time. Then what? This isn't a particularly unlikely outcome, as at that point the Republicans would doubt that the Democrats have the conviction and, yes, bull-headed stubbornness to stand their ground this time. Why give up the bargaining chips they have for government funding when they could just wait, let government grind to a halt, and eventually get their spending bill for nothing at all?

This kind of thinking is likely what motivated Trump and other Republicans to pull out of the bipartisan deal in the first place. Trump in particular doesn't do 'win-win deals,' he does deals where he wins big, and the other guy loses. They don't want to make these sorts of concessions to the Democrats; some of them, like CHIP, they're probably banking on being able to trade for some bigger prize, a 'want' rather than a 'need.' (Because let's face it, along with being cartoonishly evil, holding children health insurance hostage is a strong bargaining chip.)

And in the case of DACA, there's such strong opposition to it within the Republican ranks that if the Democrats don't negotiate from a 'You Need Us' position of strength, it's very likely never, ever going to happen. When the spending bill passes, the GOP can go right back to ignoring them entirely.

And, in response to the original suggestion that the Democrats should aim to drag it out - that the longer you wait, the more likely the Republicans are to get their house in order and not need you.

Getting the Republican house in order isn't going to make much of a difference here, as the Republicans simply don't have enough of a majority to get the necessary 60 votes all on their lonesome. The only way they could get around this would be to execise the 'nuclear option' and alter the rules so that a simple majority vote is all that is needed to get the spending bill through. (Trump, naturally, is pushing hard for this option.)

The thing is, this can have long-term reprecussions that, depending on how elections go for the next few years, might ultimately end up hurting the Republicans and benefiting the Democrats; the GOP are well aware that they are only a few seats from losing their majority altogether. But as things currently stand, even if the Democrats edge out a narrow majority, they'd still need Republican support to pass anything requiring 60 votes or more, including spending bills. This would give the Republicans an ongoing, if sporadic, position of strength from which to bargain. The nuclear option would negate that, for both parties.

Now, not to say they won't do this anyway. They did it to push their Supreme Court pick through because they were banking on enough of the liberal Supreme Court justices biting the dust or retiring for them to secure a conservative majority for decades to come. But it's a risk. Should the Democrats turn the tables even a little bit, such as securing a 51-49 lead in seats, the Republicans will have weakened their own ability to obstruct.

Catnip1024:
No, it is on the entire bunch. Sure, the administration is at primary fault. But everyone is at fault if no attempt at compromise is made.

The road to hell is paved with misplaced compromises.

Catnip1024:
Rather than attempting to wash their hands of it completely, the Democrats should be accepting that they are partially responsible, and justifying the balance of the pain caused here against the benefit of whatever concessions they get.

Unfortunately the Democratic Party is not operating in your fantasy land of a rational political environment, but the real world.

Agema:
Unfortunately the Democratic Party is not operating in your fantasy land of a rational political environment, but the real world.

Which means one has to blame the other side for everything and attempt to shirk responsibility for ones actions?

Bomber Command killed thousands of people in WW2. They did so because it was a necessary evil. They didn't attempt to wash their hands of it and blame the Germans. Politics would be a lot better place if people were prepared to admit they were causing hassle for a net benefit, rather than attempting to pin everything on the other side.

Catnip1024:

Agema:
Unfortunately the Democratic Party is not operating in your fantasy land of a rational political environment, but the real world.

Which means one has to blame the other side for everything and attempt to shirk responsibility for ones actions?

Bomber Command killed thousands of people in WW2. They did so because it was a necessary evil. They didn't attempt to wash their hands of it and blame the Germans. Politics would be a lot better place if people were prepared to admit they were causing hassle for a net benefit, rather than attempting to pin everything on the other side.

When Donald Trump said he would accept a deal, and then didn't accept a deal, yes it is one parties fault. Actually, it's one man's fault.

I mean I guess you could blame the democrats for not buying him enough hookers but that's reaching.

Catnip1024:

Agema:
Unfortunately the Democratic Party is not operating in your fantasy land of a rational political environment, but the real world.

Which means one has to blame the other side for everything and attempt to shirk responsibility for ones actions?

Bomber Command killed thousands of people in WW2. They did so because it was a necessary evil. They didn't attempt to wash their hands of it and blame the Germans. Politics would be a lot better place if people were prepared to admit they were causing hassle for a net benefit, rather than attempting to pin everything on the other side.

Im all for pointing out the hypocrisy in both parties, but in this case it is the republicans (or trumps) fault.

If this was purely "we didnt get what we want, lets throw a tantrum and shut down the government (like the repubs did in 2013)" then yea i would be on board. But the repubs intentionally withheld funding to use as a bargaining chip (not even for ideological reasons), and then use that as a hostage to demand things they know would never fly. Even then, the dems compromised only to have trump go back on it.

Ryotknife:
Im all for pointing out the hypocrisy in both parties, but in this case it is the republicans (or trumps) fault.

If this was purely "we didnt get what we want, lets throw a tantrum and shut down the government (like the repubs did in 2013)" then yea i would be on board. But the repubs intentionally withheld funding to use as a bargaining chip (not even for ideological reasons), and then use that as a hostage to demand things they know would never fly. Even then, the dems compromised only to have trump go back on it.

I'm talking about the overall view. Ultimately, anyone who voted against the budget directly caused the shutdown. This was also as a result of Trump / Republicans / whoever else, but my original post was in response to a chap saying that the Democrats should aim to draw it out, play the blame game and make it as painful as possible. Which is rather callous and overlooking the fact that thousands of government workers would suffer as a direct consequence.

So the Senate has officially voted to end the shutdown after three days, with Schumer having agreed to a three-week extension of the budget to allow negotiations on DACA to continue, with a handshake promise from Mitch McConnell that he would allow DACA onto the Senate floor.

Some people - Trump included, naturally - are already characterising this as the Democrats folding in the face of pressure, but there are a lot of things at play to consider.

So. The downside, for Democrats, is that they haven't gained any substantial concessions and they've given Trump something to crow about over the coming weeks. The upside is that strategically, this is actually great for the Democrats. See, the agreement they signed is only for three weeks. That means that if McConnell just delays and slow-walks DACA like he's been doing for the past few months, then nothing is stopping the Democrats from shutting the government down in three week's time. They haven't lost any leverage, and in return they've taken CHIP off the table and ensured that the Republicans won't be able to re-use the same trick in three week's time.

And if all goes well, they might actually manage to shift the burden of the shutdown. See, if the Senate can pass something within the next three weeks, and it goes to the House, then Paul Ryan will be stuck in the same position he put Senate Democrats in - being forced to vote against the budget that would keep the government open and therefore being stuck with responsibility for triggering the shutdown. If it passes the House and gets to the President's desk, then that's even better, because Trump will be the one directly responsible for shutting the government down.

The worst-case scenario for the Democrats is that McConnell refuses to tie a DACA deal to the budget in order to avoid the above scenario, in which case the Democrats are just back where they were last Friday, but having denied the Republicans the use of CHIP as political leverage. They lose nothing but time.

Catnip1024:
I'm talking about the overall view. Ultimately, anyone who voted against the budget directly caused the shutdown. This was also as a result of Trump / Republicans / whoever else, but my original post was in response to a chap saying that the Democrats should aim to draw it out, play the blame game and make it as painful as possible. Which is rather callous and overlooking the fact that thousands of government workers would suffer as a direct consequence.

What you're overlooking is that if the Democrats admit even partial responsibility for shutting down the government, the Trump administration will play that as admitting full responsibility. They will beat Democrats about the head with that admission relentlessly, because it would take the pressure off of the administration and because those are the rules that Trump plays by.

Trump and the Republicans fight dirty. I'm not saying the Democrats ought to get down there in the mud with them, but if we're just talking about putting some PR gloss on their culpability in what is ultimately a unified failure of government, I don't blame them for it.

bastardofmelbourne:
Trump and the Republicans fight dirty. I'm not saying the Democrats ought to get down there in the mud with them, but if we're just talking about putting some PR gloss on their culpability in what is ultimately a unified failure of government, I don't blame them for it.

You gotta know the rules of the game you're playing. Anyone that thinks the Repubs would admit to majority responsibility for the shutdown if the Dems took their fair share is living in lala land.

If a persons only worth their word, Trump isn't only not worth shit, he's not worth the effort to squeeze that shit out. And the majority of republicans are in the same boat as him. Unless it's on paper and signed for, you can't trust them to hold up their end of anything.

The biggest problem beyond Trumps lack of trustworthiness though is his ego. He's not going to want to agree to anything that can be used to make him look bad, so compromise, by nature, is just not in his wheelhouse. His ego won't allow for it.

bastardofmelbourne:
SNIP

This. So much this. It might not be a big win; heck, it's a very small win in all honesty, but it is a Win for Democrats. It's a shame that the Dreamers probably won't get their safety from this, and the next Shutdown in 3 Weeks will be closer to the end of DACA, but it's at least something for Democrats. Add that the Wall isn't getting its funding (yet), and the only one who really won were Democrats.

Also, CHIPS has been funded for 6 years, so no one has to worry about that problem anymore.

bastardofmelbourne:
Snip

The only thing that surprised me about the Republican PR is that they didn't try to use this as an opportunity to boastfully praise their President's 'legendary' deal-making abilities. I mean, Trump did nothing, of course, but that hasn't stopped him from trying to take credit in the past. But if nothing else, it seems to indicate that the Republicans- or, at the very least, Mitch- are not remotely confident in their ability to spin the shutdown hard enough to hurt the Democrats more than it hurts them. If they were, they wouldn't have even agreed to CHIP. I saw a statement tossed around suggesting that this might be the first time in modern political history that a party who controlled both the executive and legislative branch had a government shutdown occur on their watch, but I'm not sure if that's accurate. If it is, though, hey, Trump administration making history!

In any case, the Republicans conceding to this delay does signal that they are not feeling confident about the outcome of forcing a long-term shutdown. Which can only bode well for the negotiations still to come; it doesn't guarantee DACA's survival, but it might convince the Democrats to stand their ground on the issue more than they would have otherwise. And as said before, CHIP is off the table either way now, so that's something to brighten my day.

On the other hand, I read pretty soon after that Trump's slapped a 30% tariff on any imports for, quite specifically, solar panels, an industry that actually relies quite heavily on imports from abroad and will likely kneecap the development and spread of solar energy. This is soon after his administration's thankfully failed attempt to subsidise the coal industry happened. So there goes my brief spurt of positivity.

SeventhSigil:

bastardofmelbourne:
Snip

On the other hand, I read pretty soon after that Trump's slapped a 30% tariff on any imports for, quite specifically, solar panels, an industry that actually relies quite heavily on imports from abroad and will likely kneecap the development and spread of solar energy. This is soon after his administration's thankfully failed attempt to subsidise the coal industry happened. So there goes my brief spurt of positivity.

Fucking spiteful little boy.

Highlight reel:

- The White House is in full boast mode, having apparently never been taught anything about sportsmanship by their parents. I can't be too harsh; it's probably too much for me to expect Americans to be able to distinguish between what is and what is not "cricket."

- The White House's deputy press secretary went on CNN to claim that the Graham-Durbin budget deal was negotiated in bad faith, that Lindsey Graham was being "completely dishonest," and that Graham himself is in favour of "open borders and amnesty."

- Ted Cruz insists that he has always opposed shutdown politics, in spite of the fact that he was basically the mascot of the Senate filibuster in 2013, including a noteworthy recitation of Dr. Seuss's "Green Eggs and Ham" to the Senate floor.

- Liberal activist groups are fucking livid at the news that a budget deal was reached, which is a reaction I would say is premature given the actual details of the deal. If Chuck Schumer agrees to a DACA deal that isn't tied to the budget sometime next month, I would say that then is the time to panic.

- Reports are coming in that senators used a "talking stick" in negotiations on Sunday night. The stick - actually a ceremonial Maasai leadership stick owned by Sen. Susan Collins - was working great, up until Sen. Lamar Alexander threw the stick at Sen. Mark Warner after the latter interrupted him. The hurled talking stick almost shattered a glass elephant also belonging to Collins, and afterwards the group agreed to use Sen. Alexander's basketball instead, to prevent any injury.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here