Trump's "Non-Starter"

[_EAllusion]

Game of Thrones declines in quality as the seasons go on. At first, because George R. R. Martin's writing got worse after the 3rd book, then because the show-runners got ahead of Martin's writing and they are much, much worse writers than Martin is. But it's phenomenal to start. And if you are a high fantasy nerd, which you probably aren't, it's the best fix available on TV even when it's subpar.

[_canpakes]

Again:

Like this will be the last time he does it once he realizes if he hurts Americans then he can get what he wants?

Jersey Girl, how do you choose to process this point? Does Trump's tactic of shutting down the Government over something that he could or should have taken care of over the last two years strike you as the functional and democratic way to govern?

How many more times should we do this before someone holds the line and nullifies that gambit?

And even if you want to toss that logic out of the window in favor of perpetually trying to placate Man-baby over and over from here on out, tell me how Democrats - or anyone - can trust any agreement made with a pathological liar?

Heck, you know that if Democrats agreed to fund Trump's vanity wall, he'd be raging in his 2020 election rallies about how the Democrats forced him to pay for the wall with US taxpayer dollars, because he has the integrity of a wet tissue.

[_honorentheos]

Game of Thrones declines in quality as the seasons go on. At first, because George R. R. Martin's writing got worse after the 3rd book, then because the show-runners got ahead of Martin's writing and they are much, much worse writers than Martin is. But it's phenomenal to start. And if you are a high fantasy nerd, which you probably aren't, it's the best fix available on TV even when it's subpar.

I think it's to Martin's credit he basically packaged up English history and let the old adage about truth being stranger than fiction help create the twists and dark politicking with a good dash of fantasy that is reasonably restrained...other than dragons I guess. I agree it was best early on and had moments of brilliant realization on screen (Hardhome for example) but it's verging on 80s bad fantasy now. Last season was practically unwatchable and illogical.

[_Jersey Girl]

Uh oh. I've been summoned to a quiz. Okay, cp.

Again:

Like this will be the last time he does it once he realizes if he hurts Americans then he can get what he wants?

Jersey Girl, how do you choose to process this point? Does Trump's tactic of shutting down the Government over something that he could or should have taken care of over the last two years strike you as the functional and democratic way to govern?

No, of course it doesn't. But here is the thing. I don't recall what the circumstances were last time there was a potential agreement on the table, shutdown or otherwise. All of this has been lost in the chaos that has cluttered my mind since toddler boy took office.

I also don't know what the history of shutdowns is. I can't even draw on the Obama years because I quite frankly don't recall much of anything that involved Obama except that I do recall the killing of Osama Bin Laden. I think that's the only thing I can remember from the Obama Presidency. I had all sorts of major events going on during that time and almost no time to come up for air and when I did, I was working.

I don't know a lot about the mechanisms of politics for similar reasons of distraction. I gave myself over to a profession that consumed me for 3 decades. I ate, drank, breathed and slept it basically. I think that might come across in some of my posts. If it doesn't come across, you're not paying attention to what I really dive into on this board and how my tone likely changes when I do so. I'm almost certain that my tone changes. In any case, that ignorance and lack of experience with politics is why I typically hammer you guys with questions. I'm trying to make sense of what I see happening and figure things out. When I make the rare prediction, I'm not doing it based on politics. I'm doing it based on what I think that I know to be true of human behavior and motivations, and a particular human being or small/large group of human beings. I'm a behavior junkie.

Essentially INFJ starts intuiting her ass off based on what she knows about human behavior given the pieces of the individual that she has to work with thus far. <---and that is the magic that is me. ;-)

My orientation, if you will, has nothing to do with politics for the simple fact that I don't know much about it and I'm trying to learn. That is why I rely on behavior/psychology as the basis for my understanding as I move forward by developing a better understanding of politics.

Aside: I have seen more than once posters in this forum refer to high school civics classes. I recall exactly ONE thing that I learned in civics. I was too busy people watching to give a damn about the class or any part of it. I'm not joking when I say I'm a behavior junkie.

How many more times should we do this before someone holds the line and nullifies that gambit?

In this case, I'm unsure, cp. I do see a reason not to give into terrorism by toddler. On the other hand, I see no reason to believe that Pelosi (let me just use her as the face of Democrats here) has any desire to negotiate on a wall or barrier which is exactly what Trump wants and basically needs to appease his base. He wants something. They want something. Nobody is getting anything. And I don't see that he has any reason to trust that Pelosi wants to negotiate about any of what he wants or needs.

If Pelosi gives in, she loses her position of strength and decisiveness to a toddler. If Trump gives in, he loses his balls in the eyes of his base and risks losing re-election.

(See? I understand their psychological motivations, I don't always understand the political significance of what I see happening.)

And even if you want to toss that logic out of the window in favor of perpetually trying to placate Man-baby over and over from here on out, tell me how Democrats - or anyone - can trust any agreement made with a pathological liar?

They can't. But the path liar is still the sitting President and they have to deal with him somehow. Or he basically has to castrate himself before the nation and his base.

Now. If someone on one side or the other, can come up with a solution that sets Pelosi and Trump in equal footing in terms of reasonable outcome...that's the only way out of this with both of them saving face and getting folks back on the job with pay. For the life of me, I cannot figure out what that route that might be. That's why I keep asking you folks questions to pick your more politically informed brains.

Heck, you know that if Democrats agreed to fund Trump's vanity wall, he'd be raging in his 2020 election rallies about how the Democrats forced him to pay for the wall with US taxpayer dollars, because he has the integrity of a wet tissue.

Let me try to counter that. He's not only asking for a wall. He acknowledged that the wall isn't needed for certain parts of the border because there exists natural barriers. This was the first time I've ever seen him speak to natural barriers. He also included what the Democrats keep mentioning which is increased security--increased manpower/tech measures. So there is that.

He can say that the Democrats force him to pay for the wall with US tax money but the Democrats only have to put up a series of back to back clips of his own statements in chronological order that demonstrate the development of his crap narrative.

So...what is the way out of this? Trump ends the shut down and then negotiates? Hell will freeze over first.

What's the way out?


If hell froze over and he gave in to Democrat demands, ended the shut down and then they refuse to negotiate on a freaking wall, he's going to throw relentless crap at them during the campaign about how their all liars.

What's the way out?

(I have no idea how you are getting through reading this if you are, I'm boring myself crapless here just trying to respond.)

[_Jersey Girl]

That's a shame because your missing out on all the best incest. Honestly, it was like most cable TV, interesting for a while, even had moments of brilliance but is largely limping to a finale it probably can't hope to meet fan expectations. Other than Peter Dinklage as Tyrion I wouldn't say you're really missing out.

I don't think I would watch GoT. It sounds a little like AHS. I watched exactly one episode of that which I will not describe here because it was dear god, I don't even know what to call it. That was enough for me!

(All I have seen are episodes of South Park, Jersey Shore, The Kardashians, some Alaskan Bush People or whatever, Ice Road Truckers, Fixer Upper (love, love, love) and I watched the OJ miniseries and all of those with other people or at other houses. I stopped watching television some time after the Caylee Anthony case which is about the same time I discovered HGTV and found myself watching it all day long into the evening because DIY queen over here can't shut her DIY brain off. I just don't really watch any more.)

As to your comment regarding Miller. Yes, I know what's going on with him. I think he's dangerous.

I'll consider the remainder of your post. You can see I'm slow on the uptake when the topic is politics. Thanks for the reply.

I doubt it's being slow. I appreciate the caution and reflection.

Oh no. It's slow. I don't know crap about politics.

[_Chap]

I'm not suggesting any government shut downs are a good thing or that it is always wrong to stand-off on appropriations. I'm suggesting that allowing a President and his party to indefinitely shut down the government over small issues to hardball negotiations encourages future governmental dysfunction and harm. Giving in only invites similar behavior, and since trivial issues are endless, it invites similar behavior over an endless number of issues. You don't pay ransom to hostage-takers because that encourages them to take more hostages in the future to get more of what they want. ...

Er, yes. That's pretty clear.

If (which is by no means impossible) Trump is allowed his way on this issue, and then is re-elected in 2020 (also by no means impossible), do you think he wouldn't use a shut-down again, and again and ... again? Six years of effective presidential dictatorship would then lie ahead.

But if you want people to take any notice, you need to put in more profanities to convince people of your deep sincerity. And so on.

[_EAllusion]

Game of Thrones declines in quality as the seasons go on. At first, because George R. R. Martin's writing got worse after the 3rd book, then because the show-runners got ahead of Martin's writing and they are much, much worse writers than Martin is. But it's phenomenal to start. And if you are a high fantasy nerd, which you probably aren't, it's the best fix available on TV even when it's subpar.

I think it's to Martin's credit he basically packaged up English history and let the old adage about truth being stranger than fiction help create the twists and dark politicking with a good dash of fantasy that is reasonably restrained...other than dragons I guess. I agree it was best early on and had moments of brilliant realization on screen (Hardhome for example) but it's verging on 80s bad fantasy now. Last season was practically unwatchable and illogical.

As Game of Thrones, last season was basically bad Game of Thrones fanfiction. As generic high fantasy, it was pretty enough that my nerd brain can enjoy it as trash entertainment. I kept trying to lower my expectations and couldn't do it. I'm looking forward to this season with a little bit of dread.

[_Chap]

The previous post sums many people's attitude to the current Presidential situation very well:

I kept trying to lower my expectations and couldn't do it. I'm looking forward to this season with a little bit of dread.

Fortunately, it is not yet certain that there will be a next season of this particular drama..

[_EAllusion]

Without a Wall our Country can never have Border or National Security. With a powerful Wall or Steel Barrier, Crime Rates (and Drugs) will go substantially down all over the U.S. The Democrats know this but want to play political games. Must finally be done correctly. No Cave!

Just a reminder that wall on the Canadian border is probably the next evolution of this madness.

[_Kevin Graham]

Imho, I think if they were to 'make a deal' with Trump this will be quickly forgotten and we can get back to impeaching Trump and prepping for a busy DNC primaries without hurting the very people Democrats say they champion. I think Democrats have the moral obligation to do what's right because it's simply impossible for the Right to do it. Someone has to do it, because there are a lot of people who live paycheck to paycheck depending on the government to get this done.
- Doc

1. Democrats would prefer Trump be voted out of office rather than impeached. For defrauding Americans on his taxes he'll face civil charges at the very least when out of office.
2. If Trump gets his wall, it will only reaffirm those who have the misguided perception that Trump is a "winner" who makes things happen and keeps his promises.
3. If Trump doesn't get his wall, it would all but guarantee he only has two more years left as President.
4. There is no "negotiation" here and Pelosi and Schumer have said as much. Negotiations for a wall cannot begin until the government is reopened, otherwise what you're doing is allowing someone to successfully use 800,000 workers as bargaining chips.
5. How is it impossible for the Right to do it? They could very easily reopen the government if Mitch McConnell would allow existing legislation to be voted on. Legislation that was already set to pass before Trump caught wind of the fact that FOX News and Ann Coulter were starting not to like him anymore.

I don't know what your point is for providing a graphic of every shutdown in history. Most of those were short lived and only two are comparable in terms of length.

The shutdown of 2013 happened because Republicans refused to accept the Affordable Care Act and they tried delaying and defunding it. The difference between that issue and Trump's "Wall" is that the ACA had already become the law of the land through the normal legislative process. As such, they were obligated to do their job and fund an existing law. It wasn't like Obama couldn't get it passed and then suddenly threatened to shut down the government unless Congress gave him the Affordable Care Act. That is more like what Trump is doing right now. The shutdown of 2013 knocked the GDP down by nearly a percentage point and cost the economy roughly $55 billion. After enough damage was done to the economy and public opinion overwhelmingly blamed Republicans, they eventually gave in.

The 1995 shutdown was over a spending Bill that Clinton had vetoed. Republicans led by Newt Gingrich wanted to drastically cut spending for education, medicare, Public Health, the environment, etc. This was a legitimate negotiation scenario which lasted three weeks. But public polling showed that the majority of Americans blamed Republicans, not Democrats.