Government Shutdown (Funding now expires 2/15/19) (1 Viewer)

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
45,861
Reaction score
60,259
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
This one looking like it might happen, because two out of three interests seem to think it might help them - or at least not hurt them as much as others.

1. Democrats: (1) Trump gave them a huge gift when he proclaimed on live television that he would be proud to shut the government down over wall funding. There is always political risk to being party to a shutdown but that gave the Democrats strong plausible deniability and laid this shutdown right at Trump's feet. Had he not done that, he could have used his media advantage and gift for trash-talking to point the finger at the Democrats and that would have concerned them. Now, that pressure is lifted and though he will still try it, they have the upper hand (because he gave it to them); (2) the Democrats know that when the new Congress is sworn in, they will have a House majority, which gives them substantially more leverage to make bargains, so pushing funding debate back until January works in their favor.

2. Trump: (1) He knows that on January 3, 2019, things get dicier for him on Capitol Hill, so this might be his last best chance to get wall funding - so digging in now on the hopes that the Democrats will begin to get worried about losing face with the electorate might bring them around . . . this is probably not going to happen for the reasons stated above, but you never know how these things go until you get into them, so there's that; (2) Trump's base remains motivated by any appearance of 'insurgent' tactics to push their agenda - and "shutting down the government 'cause we can't get the wall built' likely plays well to that group and perhaps Trump sees the blue gains in November and things he needs to re-invigorate his 2016 demographic and a shutdown might actually help in that regard (not sure if that's true but it could be the calculus).

The Republicans in the Senate are the most obvious interest aligned against a shutdown. They know that shutdowns can be harmful and they know that Trump has already publicly claimed responsibility for any shutdown that might occur - so there's good reason for their concern that Trump might drag them along. To this end, it is clear that many Republican senators no longer feel that it is in their interest to remain aligned with Trump despite disagreement - the Saudi resolutions last week are clear proof of that.

Shutdowns really are problematic for many reasons - perhaps one of the most important (and overlooked by the average person) is just how much effort and energy it takes for a federal agency to go through a shutdown process. It requires every office within the agency to shift from the work they usually do in furtherance of their mission, to go through days of planning, paperwork, and contingency preparation to get a shutdown done in the orderly fashion it requires - and then there's work on the back end when they turn the lights back on. But perhaps because a shutdown from December 21 through the new year wouldn't have as noticeable impact as a shutdown in early October (when annual appropriations typically lapse), the interests involved have calculated that a shutdown now might be somewhat muted in its effect - making it more of a symbolic result than one that is truly damaging in the practical sense.

And that might actually increase the odds that it's going to happen. Right now, it appears that a shutdown is more likely than not.




 

insidejob

Respect existence or expect resistance.
Approved Blogger
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
26,109
Reaction score
42,609
Location
70005
Offline
We could really use the NFIP reauthorization as well, which never gets mentioned in all the shutdown nonsense. Come Friday, nobody can buy flood insurance until it gets more than a one, then two week extension (12/7, then 12/21). They're already raising rates for 2019, so there's partial funding. Just fund the damn government, admit you don't have the votes for what you want, and then go spend Christmas at Mar a forking Lago with your criminal family, you piece of trash president.
 
Last edited:

Goatman Saint

Subscribing Member
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Platinum VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 18, 1999
Messages
20,365
Reaction score
16,672
Age
47
Location
Between here and there
Offline
that’s because Trump doesn’t care about you, doesn’t really care about most things. I’d like somebody who understands Trump logic to explain this. “Mexico will pay for the wall”. Ok, been repeated time and time again. First thing he does is ask congress for funding to build the wall. That’s not México. Then, in the last week he spouted out how if congress won’t pay for it he will have the military pay for it. Sorry dude, everyone who understands a government budget knows that can’t happen.

So, why are we going to have our government shut down, real peoples lives effected, to fund a wall that “Mexico will pay for”?
 

insidejob

Respect existence or expect resistance.
Approved Blogger
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
26,109
Reaction score
42,609
Location
70005
Offline
that’s because Trump doesn’t care about you, doesn’t really care about most things. I’d like somebody who understands Trump logic to explain this. “Mexico will pay for the wall”. Ok, been repeated time and time again. First thing he does is ask congress for funding to build the wall. That’s not México. Then, in the last week he spouted out how if congress won’t pay for it he will have the military pay for it. Sorry dude, everyone who understands a government budget knows that can’t happen.

So, why are we going to have our government shut down, real peoples lives effected, to fund a wall that “Mexico will pay for”?
They still believe that we're going to win so bigly with trade with Mexico that that is actually considered Mexico paying for the wall. That's the lie he switched to after taking office.
 

Taurus

More than 15K posts served!
VIP Contributor
Joined
Dec 20, 1997
Messages
24,942
Reaction score
12,864
Age
51
Location
Yacolt, WA
Offline
that’s because Trump doesn’t care about you, doesn’t really care about most things. I’d like somebody who understands Trump logic to explain this. “Mexico will pay for the wall”. Ok, been repeated time and time again. First thing he does is ask congress for funding to build the wall. That’s not México. Then, in the last week he spouted out how if congress won’t pay for it he will have the military pay for it. Sorry dude, everyone who understands a government budget knows that can’t happen.

So, why are we going to have our government shut down, real peoples lives effected, to fund a wall that “Mexico will pay for”?
Because "Mexico will pay for it" magnified his negotiating prowess in the moment he said it. It made him feel bigger.

The thing you have to remember about Trump is that he's not really a human being the way the rest of us understand the term. He's a walking hole of narcissism. He is his disease, it defines him, controls him, there is no Trump that is not NPD.

This is how he can lie, repeatedly, about things that are easily disproved. It's how he can promise that Mexico will pay for a wall, then immediately begin seeking funds from American sources.

To Cheeto, none of us are real. Truth isn't real. Only his ego and insatiable need for narcissistic supply is real.
 

Saint_Ward

The Great Eye is ever Watchful
Staff member
Administrator
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
42,230
Reaction score
34,869
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Online
Well, that was quick (maybe).

https://www.wsj.com/articles/white-house-signals-flexibility-on-border-wall-funding-as-shutdown-looms-11545152037?mod=hp_lead_pos3

WASHINGTON—The White House signaled on Tuesday it was backing off its demand for $5 billion to pay for a border wall, while rocky negotiations on Capitol Hill prompted Senate GOP leaders to start drafting a short-term spending deal to avoid a partial government shutdown this weekend.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Richard Shelby (R., Ala.) said Tuesday night he was preparing a short-term spending bill that would keep the government open until early February.


“Barring some unforeseen development, I think that’s where we’re headed,” Mr. Shelby said.

President Trump hasn’t indicated if he would sign a short-term measure, which would continue funding for border security but not for a wall. Last week, Mr. Trump said publicly he would be “proud” to shut down the government if lawmakers don’t include $5 billion in funding for a Mexico border wall in their spending package.
Senate Democrats signaled earlier Tuesday an openness to a short-term extension, which often becomes more appealing to lawmakers as spending deadlines approach and they become eager to return home for the holidays. “We’d certainly very seriously look at it,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the chamber’s Democratic leader.
Negotiations had accelerated Tuesday after White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said that Mr. Trump didn’t want a shutdown and the administration could find “other ways” to obtain the wall funding amid continued Democratic opposition.
In an interview with Fox News, Ms. Sanders indicated Mr. Trump could support a bipartisan Senate bill funding the Homeland Security Department, which oversees the border, if other funding were diverted to the wall. That bill includes $1.6 billion for border security, including fencing and new technology, but wouldn’t permit the construction of a concrete wall.
Asked about the possibility of a government shutdown Tuesday afternoon, Mr. Trump said: “We’ll see what happens.” He declined to answer a question about whether he would insist a spending bill include funding for a wall, saying: “We need border security.”
 

mt15

Subscribing Member
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Subscribing Member
Platinum VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 14, 2006
Messages
12,775
Reaction score
17,151
Offline
What a master of negotiation, lol.
 
OP
OP
superchuck500

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
45,861
Reaction score
60,259
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
What a master of negotiation, lol.
He's "good" as using leverage when he is in a position of strength - but that isn't really the same thing as genuine negotiation. Negotiating from leverage is easy as long as you're willing to use it, and he clearly is (some people don't like to apply leverage they have because they're too empathetic, but Trump doesn't have that problem).

A truly skilled negotiator can work from a neutral to weak position and still make progress. Trump has shown that he's actually not that good at negotiating when he doesn't have disproportionate leverage - it's just another one of those areas where reality diverges from his perception.
 

dtc

VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
28,167
Reaction score
26,068
Location
Redneck Riviera
Offline
We could really use the NFIP reauthorization as well, which never gets mentioned in all the shutdown nonsense. Come Friday, nobody can buy flood insurance until it gets more than a one, then two week extension (12/7, then 12/21). They're already raising rates for 2019, so there's partial funding. Just fund the damn government, admit you don't have the votes for what you want, and then go spend Christmas at Mar a forking Lago with your criminal family, you piece of trash president.
If there is a part of government that ought to be shutdown it is the criminally misguided and essentially kidnapped NFIP program, but that's another discussion.
 

UriUT

Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2001
Messages
367
Reaction score
473
Offline
You have to credit Trump for his salesmanship. He brands complete failure as a gift of god to those uninformed and unfortunate enough to use their gift above the shoulders. NAFTA 2.0 isn't significantly different from 1.0. Korea was some Churchchillesque diplomacy in their eyes. He is the smartest thinker to those same folks. He is what a rich man is suppose to be...so the saying goes...he is an idiot's version of a smart man, the poor man's version of a rich man.
 

efil4stnias

ppfffffttttt
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 9, 2001
Messages
28,584
Reaction score
24,861
Location
Madisonville
Offline
He's "good" as using leverage when he is in a position of strength - but that isn't really the same thing as genuine negotiation. Negotiating from leverage is easy as long as you're willing to use it, and he clearly is (some people don't like to apply leverage they have because they're too empathetic, but Trump doesn't have that problem).

A truly skilled negotiator can work from a neutral to weak position and still make progress. Trump has shown that he's actually not that good at negotiating when he doesn't have disproportionate leverage - it's just another one of those areas where reality diverges from his perception.
ask his subcontractors.
 

UriUT

Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2001
Messages
367
Reaction score
473
Offline
He's "good" as using leverage when he is in a position of strength - but that isn't really the same thing as genuine negotiation. Negotiating from leverage is easy as long as you're willing to use it, and he clearly is (some people don't like to apply leverage they have because they're too empathetic, but Trump doesn't have that problem).

A truly skilled negotiator can work from a neutral to weak position and still make progress. Trump has shown that he's actually not that good at negotiating when he doesn't have disproportionate leverage - it's just another one of those areas where reality diverges from his perception.
This is why I get so triggered when someone brings up how much of a great businessman Trump is and how he will be great as president. He bullied contractors that can't afford counsel and dared them to sue him. However, this same bullying tactic used against the NYTimes which had legal muscle was...laughed at.

I think this was the letter.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/10/13/us/politics/david-mccraw-trump-letter.html
 
OP
OP
superchuck500

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
45,861
Reaction score
60,259
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
Senate passes a measure to punt to February. House will probably pass it.

The White House has refused to commit to signing it.


 

Saint_Ward

The Great Eye is ever Watchful
Staff member
Administrator
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
42,230
Reaction score
34,869
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Online
Senate passes a measure to punt to February. House will probably pass it.

The White House has refused to commit to signing it.


Question, with CR's, does it follow the usual process? i.e. if the president doesn't sign or Veto, they can override it with a super majority?
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Booker Political Discussion Board 8

Similar threads




Saints Headlines (The Advocate)

Headlines

Top Bottom