Trump's "Non-Starter"

[_Jersey Girl]

What do you guys think of Trump's proposal? I haven't seen anyone say.

ETA: I'm still listening and reading. So far, I think the proposal was reasonable.

[_subgenius]

So let me get this straight. Mitch McConnell refused to put a bill on the floor that had already passed the House because he said it was pointless since the President didn't agree to sign it. But now he "pledges" to Trump that he will let them vote on a bogus bill that has no chance of passing the House? Yes, Mitch McConnell is nothing short of Trump's puppet. He doesn't understand the separation of powers and doesn't understand that Congress can pass a budget and end the shutdown without the President.

I don't understand how you still don't understand or know how your government works.
Google "colloquy" , because the sentiment expressed during this last one should clarify your confusions (see also sauce for goose, sauce for gander).


...
...

(spoiler alert: "‘That’s why I’m the majority leader and you’re the minority whip’").

[_subgenius]

What do you guys think of Trump's proposal? I haven't seen anyone say.

ETA: I'm still listening and reading. So far, I think the proposal was reasonable.

most will think whatever the pundits and Pelosi tell them to think. In reality, its a good offer and reasonable...but reasonable is not on the table with Democrats...

[_Jersey Girl]

On what basis would Democrats reject this? I'm not seeing it.

[_Res Ipsa]

RI what is your impression of Trump's proposal? Fair or not?

I think it’s a tactic to try and make the president seem like he’s being flexible, when actually he’s not. It’s more of a political move than an actual attempt to negotiate. I suspect it was motivated by bad poll numbers than any desire to make a deal.

It’s not fair because Trump is still taking the livelihoods of 800,000 Americans hostage because he can’t persuade the legislature to do something he wants. What would be fair is to release his hostages, put the government back to work, and try to negotiate an immigration deal that includes a wall or fencing or barriers.

Democrats have voted in favor of increased border security and will again. The DACA and TPS portions of the offer just kick the can down the road. I think there is a general immigration deal to be done that includes all this stuff, but I don’t think this is close.

[_Res Ipsa]

On what basis would Democrats reject this? I'm not seeing it.

What do you understand the proposal to be?

[_Jersey Girl]

On what basis would Democrats reject this? I'm not seeing it.

What do you understand the proposal to be?

I listened to the speech just once. I will listen to it again if you tell me I need to. A wall in strategic locations--acknowledging natural barriers where a wall is not needed. A steel kind of see through structure as the wall. Increased budget for more border security (human resources and technology), concessions regarding 3 year (what should I call this, a grace period I suppose) on DACA and TPS, something about applying for asylum in native countries (country of origin), scheduling ongoing conferences/talks to develop the plan beyond the initial stages and improve immigration policy and law.

And in between that a bunch of crap about drugs, dealers, rapers, and criminals wandering around the country doing damage. The usual.

I am sure I left something out for as I stated, I only listened one time. I don't get the full gist of a speech the first time around because politics isn't my first language.

So tell me where I am wrong, what I am missing and on what basis the Democrats would reject this?

[_Res Ipsa]

Several reasons. First, they’ve staked out a position that it’s wrong for the president to shut the government down in order to get something he is unable to get through the normal political process. It’s a position with merit and appeal. If a president can do this anytime to get his way, we look more like a dictatorship than a democracy. They might move off this position, but it would take a much more favorable deal. This deal doesn’t give the Democrats much that they want. It simply kicks DACA and TPS down the road, and changes amnesty law to be more exclusive. About the only real carrot for Democrats I see is renewing VAWA. But I doubt that’s enough to get Democrats to take the deal.

[_Jersey Girl]

Several reasons. First, they’ve staked out a position that it’s wrong for the president to shut the government down in order to get something he is unable to get through the normal political process.

Wait. Are you saying that Democrats have no part in the shut down?

It’s a position with merit and appeal. If a president can do this anytime to get his way, we look more like a dictatorship than a democracy. They might move off this position, but it would take a much more favorable deal. This deal doesn’t give the Democrats much that they want. It simply kicks DACA and TPS down the road, and changes amnesty law to be more exclusive. About the only real carrot for Democrats I see is renewing VAWA. But I doubt that’s enough to get Democrats to take the deal.

I need to read that 20 times until it sinks in. I'm not prepared to respond to it.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

The Democrats could just give him the money and the government would open up immediately.

- Doc