But a proposal that offers only temporary protections for DACA and TPS recipients—without a path to citizenship—has historically been viewed as a nonstarter by most Democrats, in part because it was Trump himself who has tried to revoke protections for both groups. And sure enough, as details of the president’s offer leaked out ahead of his address on Saturday, Democrats were quick to pour cold water on it. “Initial reports make clear that his proposal is a compilation of several previously rejected initiatives, each of which is unacceptable and in total, do not represent a good faith effort to restore certainty to people’s lives,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a statement before Trump’s remarks. “For one thing, this proposal does not include the permanent solution for the Dreamers and TPS recipients that our country needs and supports.”
“It’s clear the President realizes that by closing the government and hurting so many American workers and their families, he has put himself and the country in an untenable position,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement following the president’s address. “Unfortunately, he keeps putting forward one-sided and ineffective remedies. There’s only way out: open up the government, Mr. President, and then Democrats and Republicans can have a civil discussion and come up with bipartisan solutions.”
Put in Jersey terms, the "deal" is another example of Trump walking into a business, damned crap up and then offering to stop and provide protection from others who might want to “F” crap up so long as the shop owner pays.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
For me the precedent of shutting the government down whenever someone seeks political advantage is a terrible pattern. It shows that some of those involved are not serious about governing but are actually seeking destruction of the Constitution and our institutions. We need to call this out.
The thing about the shutdown over wall funding is that Republicans had unified control of the government for 2 years prior to this. If it was collectively important to them, they could've easily passed it if they wanted to. They already had deals on the table for that funding. If Trump genuinely felt it was a national emergency that required shutting down the government as a negotiating tactic, he spent 2 years not doing that. There is also a long record of him explicitly stating that he favors shutting down the government as a negotiating tactic along with him explicitly taking credit for shutting down the government in this case as a negotiating tactic.
Virtually every journalist who covers this story understands this. It's not a mystery. For Democrats, it's about working the media so they don't pretend to adopt a public relations line from Republicans that everyone knows exists in bad faith. Journalists routinely cover bad faith Republican narratives as serious because they don't want to be seen as biased and several important editorial voices view political coverage as a he-said/she-said sporting event. Democrats care very much about how mainstream media covers topics because it can move opinion against them because liberals and moderates are affected by it. Republicans, by contrast, can count on right-wing media propagandizing whatever position they take today, even if it contradicts the one they took yesterday or will take tomorrow. Their electoral strategy simply does not care about mainstream narratives because of this dynamic.
Once you understand this dynamic, the game you see play out makes a lot more sense.
EAllusion wrote:The thing about the shutdown over wall funding is that Republicans had unified control of the government for 2 years prior to this. If it was collectively important to them, they could've easily passed it if they wanted to.
So why didn't they? Or more specifically, why didn't Trump get this done while he had control of both houses of Congress.
'Building the wall" was probably the issue he hammered most of all throughout his election campaign. So why did he wait until after the mid-terms before pushing for it hard?
I am genuinely puzzled. Can anyone explain?
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
EAllusion wrote:The thing about the shutdown over wall funding is that Republicans had unified control of the government for 2 years prior to this. If it was collectively important to them, they could've easily passed it if they wanted to.
So why didn't they? Or more specifically, why didn't Trump get this done while he had control of both houses of Congress.
'Building the wall" was probably the issue he hammered most of all throughout his election campaign. So why did he wait until after the mid-terms before pushing for it hard?
I am genuinely puzzled. Can anyone explain?
Republicans leadership doesn't care about the wall funding enough to invoke their partisan phalanx tactic and there are several Republican politicians who oppose it. They couldn't get wall-funding through without giving up actual concessions instead of Trump promising to delay implementation of a problem of his own making. They were set to vote in veto-proof numbers to keep the government open without wall funding in December with no problem.
Now that Democrats have the House and Trump is in a partisan battle over shutting down the government over it, they're messaging a unified front in order to win media framing. Democrats have a very strong incentive to oppose this as allowing the president to hold the basic functioning of the federal government hostage to negotiate for trivial pet projects sets a very bad precedent. That's why Trump frames the issue as a "National Emergency!" even though it very obviously is not.
Chap wrote: ... why didn't Trump get this done while he had control of both houses of Congress.
'Building the wall" was probably the issue he hammered most of all throughout his election campaign. So why did he wait until after the mid-terms before pushing for it hard?
EAllusion wrote:Republicans leadership doesn't care about the wall funding enough to invoke their partisan phalanx tactic and there are several Republican politicians who oppose it. They couldn't get wall-funding through without giving up actual concessions instead of Trump promising to delay implementation of a problem of his own making. They were set to vote in veto-proof numbers to keep the government open without wall funding in December with no problem.
Thanks for your reply. I already realised that the Republicans in congress had little interest in wall-building. My question was however really about Trump. Why did he wait for two years before he began to push on this issue that was so central to his campaign?
This is a separate question from why in the last month or so he reneged on the done deal and suddenly demanded the wall or nothing - we know that was the result of Anne Coulter and other talking heads making him feel a wuss. I am asking why Trump's active interest in the wall has come so late in his term of office. Didn't he think it mattered much to his base?
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Chap wrote: Thanks for your reply. I already realised that the Republicans in congress had little interest in wall-building. My question was however really about Trump. Why did he wait for two years before he began to push on this issue that was so central to his campaign?
Democrats have Congress now, so he can blame them. He has to play ball with Republicans to an extent, because they're running interference for him. Trump goes down in flames the second they stop being complicit.
Chap wrote: ... why didn't Trump get this done while he had control of both houses of Congress.
'Building the wall" was probably the issue he hammered most of all throughout his election campaign. So why did he wait until after the mid-terms before pushing for it hard?
EAllusion wrote:Republicans leadership doesn't care about the wall funding enough to invoke their partisan phalanx tactic and there are several Republican politicians who oppose it. They couldn't get wall-funding through without giving up actual concessions instead of Trump promising to delay implementation of a problem of his own making. They were set to vote in veto-proof numbers to keep the government open without wall funding in December with no problem.
Thanks for your reply. I already realised that the Republicans in congress had little interest in wall-building. My question was however really about Trump. Why did he wait for two years before he began to push on this issue that was so central to his campaign?
This is a separate question from why in the last month or so he reneged on the done deal and suddenly demanded the wall or nothing - we know that was the result of Anne Coulter and other talking heads making him feel a wuss. I am asking why Trump's active interest in the wall has come so late in his term of office. Didn't he think it mattered much to his base?
The Wall is for Trump. The Relief Society already got their prizes--tax cuts, Federalist Society judges and the wrecking of the establishment regulatory apparatus. They'll throw him and even his wall under the bus if they have to. This is Washington, D.C.
Past attempts when Republicans had full control couldn't get the 60 votes in the Senate to beat the filibuster, which it has been argued they could have found a way around. But the underlying fundamentals remain the same as to why it wasn't worth the political capital to Republicans to do so on this issue when they were very willing to do it when opposing the Affordable Care Act and Supreme Court nominations.
The fact is, no one but Trump and his base actually want a physical albatross like a wall built that can be hung around their necks in the future when it proves expensive as well as ineffective. Trump is the only politician who gains from it. So when it came to the horse trading of getting a bill passed that Trump would sign, Democrats understood they had leverage to get immigration policy fixes tied to funding and demanded it. But there is a core group of conservatives who view any attempt to fix immigration as granting amnesty to undocumented immigrants. Republicans tried to attack them by publicly criticizing them for tying a DACA fix to wall funding in order to taunt them into accepting separate funding and immigration fix bills, but that was a long shot Democrats would have been stupid to take.
There were a few examples of both put forward but shot down, most famous being the three competing bills put forward last February including a bi-partisan bill that looks awefully similar to what most rational people imagine a current deal will need to include. It foreshadowed where we are today with McConnell getting buggered by Trump because he was given to believe the President would support a bipartisan bill provided it included wall funding...and then came out in public opposition because the Ann Coulter types thought it was another amnesty bill. The White House put out a competing proposal that was DOA due to it's harsh anti-immigration measures included to appease the anti-amnesty conservatives.
Chap wrote: Thanks for your reply. I already realised that the Republicans in congress had little interest in wall-building. My question was however really about Trump. Why did he wait for two years before he began to push on this issue that was so central to his campaign?
Democrats have Congress now, so he can blame them. He has to play ball with Republicans to an extent, because they're running interference for him. Trump goes down in flames the second they stop being complicit.
I believe Trump sincerely thought the Republicans could win a super majority in the 2018 midterms, and that he wouldn't have his posturing over a shutdown or claiming border security is a national emergency called out as a bluff. I don't think Trump sees the ability to blame Democrats in the House as a strengthening of his position that influenced his behavior in 2017-2018, waffling between supporting any bill that funded the wall and opposing any bill that included DACA fixes. He's like a trapped animal in a pen being beaten no matter where he runs and can't find an exit - when he runs to one side he gets hit over wall funding, when he runs to the other side he gets hit over being soft on immigration. So where to run? He has to build the wall to keep a promise, but to do so without a Republican super majority in the Senate or House control requires negotiating with Democrats which means he'll still anger the same people who want to see the wall built. He backed off of the threat to call border security a national emergency, which I assume means he's been beat up behind the scenes over that and can't view it as an exit, either.
Trump isn't worth looking at anymore. He's boxed in, and he can't help move the discussion. We all know that. The conversation HAS to turn to Senate Republicans and making sure they are getting the same blame Trump is getting if we want to see movement.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
