Democrats, what would be a good trade-off for the $5B?

[WillowTree]

Yeah O lied hundreds of times. Him and W are even worse than trump.

DOW opened off 361 You and Willow want to blame Obama?

Well just recently the obamaturd marched out and said the economy was his. Who should we blame? Was the obamaturd lying?

I guess Willow you have to hold both of them back to back and make up your mind who the real liar is When and IF Obama said the economy was his he meant the good and getting better economy he handed over to trump Remember hearing Trump bleating on how great HIS markets were doing ?? Hear from him recently about last year the worst in 10 years???What a pos you support

Yeah well, you have options.

Wrong, he has facts; you have echoes and opinions framed for you by Limbaugh, Hannity, and all others who profit from keeping chaos on going.

You do not have a brain. Just talking points! MSNBC talks for ewe!

 

[bendog]

This is politics, after all. Give and take. Or at least that USED to be the rule, when we were sane.

What would be a good trade-off to write that check? Improved DACA status? Amnesty of some kind? Maybe another issue? Climate change funding?
.

Why are u asking Dems? The ball's in Trump's court. Congress reached a compromise and Trump reneged, after agreeing as well, because of RW media. I think the Dems have been clear that they're not even negotiating unless Trump personally gets behind some offer.

Actually, I've been thinking I should have posed the questions to everyone, anyone.

Yeah, I'd also be curious to know what kind of compromise the GOP would be willing to make. If any. That's a dirty word right now.
.

Well Graham floated a DACA fix for 5bil on the wall (which isn't a wall). But Trump reneged on that deal before he reneged on the December deal. So, I think it really is up to Trump. He's cut off Pence and McConnell at the knees on this.

Pelosi will pass a continuing resolution to fully open govt tomorrow. McConnell says nothing passes the Senate without Trump's express proposal. The various media outlets can characterize facts anyway they want to, but the fact is the Dems are open to opening govt without funding a concrete wall, and Trump will not agree to any compromise without a concrete wall, even though he knows there will never be a 2200 mile contiguous concrete wall. He's painted himself against a wall (pun intended) rallying his base, and no sane opponent would help him out of his predicament.

You don't think he'd give something up in exchange for funding? Seems to me that was his biggest promise, so maybe he'd be willing to do something.

He's sounded immovable so far, but it's not like he's a man of his word. And I bet his base would declare victory. As usual, this is all about optics and sloganeering.
.

He's never made a deal he won't renege on. That's why he can only get loans from Russian mobsters.

But the question is what he can give without getting pilloried by RW media for selling out his supporters.

 

[Mac1958]

This is politics, after all. Give and take. Or at least that USED to be the rule, when we were sane.

What would be a good trade-off to write that check? Improved DACA status? Amnesty of some kind? Maybe another issue? Climate change funding?
.

Why are u asking Dems? The ball's in Trump's court. Congress reached a compromise and Trump reneged, after agreeing as well, because of RW media. I think the Dems have been clear that they're not even negotiating unless Trump personally gets behind some offer.

Actually, I've been thinking I should have posed the questions to everyone, anyone.

Yeah, I'd also be curious to know what kind of compromise the GOP would be willing to make. If any. That's a dirty word right now.
.

Well Graham floated a DACA fix for 5bil on the wall (which isn't a wall). But Trump reneged on that deal before he reneged on the December deal. So, I think it really is up to Trump. He's cut off Pence and McConnell at the knees on this.

Pelosi will pass a continuing resolution to fully open govt tomorrow. McConnell says nothing passes the Senate without Trump's express proposal. The various media outlets can characterize facts anyway they want to, but the fact is the Dems are open to opening govt without funding a concrete wall, and Trump will not agree to any compromise without a concrete wall, even though he knows there will never be a 2200 mile contiguous concrete wall. He's painted himself against a wall (pun intended) rallying his base, and no sane opponent would help him out of his predicament.

You don't think he'd give something up in exchange for funding? Seems to me that was his biggest promise, so maybe he'd be willing to do something.

He's sounded immovable so far, but it's not like he's a man of his word. And I bet his base would declare victory. As usual, this is all about optics and sloganeering.
.

He's never made a deal he won't renege on. That's why he can only get loans from Russian mobsters.

But the question is what he can give without getting pilloried by RW media for selling out his supporters.

Agreed. But I have no doubt they'd declare pretty much anything over a billion as a major victory, even if it only paid for a picket fence across a county or two.

That would look pretty silly for sure, but what's new.
.

 

[WillowTree]

This is politics, after all. Give and take. Or at least that USED to be the rule, when we were sane.

What would be a good trade-off to write that check? Improved DACA status? Amnesty of some kind? Maybe another issue? Climate change funding?
.

I would protect all the DACA people.

Then I would add the following:

Total repeal of the tax cut passed in 2017.
Total and proper funding and support of Obamacare.
Establish a new tax to pay for the wall and it's maintenance. Impose a 50% tax on all unearned income on those who receive 250 thousand and more in unearned income. Also impose a 50% tax on luxury items such as private jets, their fuel and hangers they're stored in.
There would be no building of a wall until the revenues to pay for it have been collected. No bonds sold or any sort of debt can be allowed to build that wall.

How about a fair flat tax of 25% so everyone has some skin in the game and it would stop jackasses like you from wanting to tax everyone else! Use the money we spend on illegals to pay for the wall no need for additional taxes! That’s all a brain dead democrat can think of is taxing the shit out of the earners!

Why is it that conservatives can scream they don't want their tax dollars paying for something but liberals can't do the same? Conservatives actually get their way too. There are things that conservatives have made it illegal for our federal tax dollars to pay for. Yet you expect to be the only ones who can do that.

I don't want a wall. The majority of the nation doesn't want a wall. WHY?

If you and trump want a wall pay for it. Don't make the rest of us pay for and don't add it to the national debt.

The rich get the most benefits from undocumented workers. They get cheap labor, they don't have to pay for any benefits or follow the labor laws of our nation. Deny the rich, build the wall.

If you really were serious about preventing undocumented workers you would support what will actually work. Hold the criminal employers accountable for the crimes they are committing by hiring those undocumented workers. Those criminal employers are reaping millions off the undocumented workers and us citizens. Yet you let them get away with those crimes.

If criminal employers were thrown in prison for at least a decade, their business destroyed and they're totally bankrupted, no employer would hire an undocumented worker. No American would lose a job to an undocumented worker and they would stop coming here. FALSE. THE ACLU HAS SUED DENYING EMPLOYERS THE RIGHT TO ASL. GIVE THE EMPLOYER A FULL PROOF METHOD OF VERIFYING CITIZENSHIP THEN SPEW YOUR BULLSHIT ABOUT ARRESTING THEM.

If there's no job, they won't come.

Instead you want to let those criminals keep getting away with their crimes and to keep getting filthy rich off their crimes.

THE CRIMINALS ARE THE ILLEGALS. UNTIL EWE GIVE ENPLOYERS A FULLPROOF WAY OF VERIFICATION OF CITIZENSHIP1

 

[edward37]

Everyone knows that 56b is chump change when it comes to government spending. Obama gave that much to dying solar companies. Democrats don't care about the Wall. They will stonewall (pardon the pun) everything the President tries to do for the next two years.

Maybe you can show us your posts of displeasure when that scumbag McConnell did the same to Obama?

 

[Fugazi]

Easy. Take the initial construction cost and all future maintenance out of the defense budget. Park a few less tanks that sit there doing nothing.

 

[WillowTree]

Everyone knows that 56b is chump change when it comes to government spending. Obama gave that much to dying solar companies. Democrats don't care about the Wall. They will stonewall (pardon the pun) everything the President tries to do for the next two years.

Maybe you can show us your posts of displeasure when that scumbag McConnell did the same to Obama?

Please list those things that were denied the obamaturd! Waiting.

 

[easyt65]

This is politics, after all. Give and take. Or at least that USED to be the rule, when we were sane.

What would be a good trade-off to write that check? Improved DACA status? Amnesty of some kind? Maybe another issue? Climate change funding?
.

$5 Billion Dollars...

In 2007 Barak Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Schumer voted for this.

In 2009 Barak Obama and Democrats passed a $1 trillion failed Stimulus Bill that contained 7,000 Democratic Party-Only PORK that spent MORE that $5 Billion in Pork, which included money (requested and agreed upon by Democrats) to pay for a 'research project' that studied why the sex life of a homosexual Argentinian male was 'better' than that of a heterosexual US male...putting the most advanced storm windows in a Ranger Station scheduled to be demolished 8 months later, 'shrimp on a treadmill', etc ...

--- LET THAT SINK IN: DEMOCRATS BELIEVE / BELIEVED FINDING OUT WHY THE SEX LIFE OF AN ARGENTINIAN MALE IS BETTER THAN A US HETEROSEXUAL MALE is / was more important that agreeing to $5 Billion towards ensuring our sovereignty, securing our borders, and protecting US citizens.

Democrats just agreed to a deal to send MORE THAN TWICE what the President is asking for to Argentina, Venezuela, Mexico, etc... corrupt nations that do not use it to improve their nation and improve things for their citizens, nations who facilitate the continued illegal migration and attempted invasion of their people into the United States...

What would be a good response by the Democrats?

STOP STANDING WITH VIOLENT ILLEGALS, CORRUPT FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS, MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS, HUMAN TRAFFICKERS, FEDERAL LAW-VIOLATING SANCTUARY CITIES, AND START SIDING WITH / REPRESENTING THE AMERICAN CITIZENS WHO ELECTED THAM AND WHO THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE REPRESENTING.

 

[Mac1958]

This is politics, after all. Give and take. Or at least that USED to be the rule, when we were sane.

What would be a good trade-off to write that check? Improved DACA status? Amnesty of some kind? Maybe another issue? Climate change funding?
.

$5 Billion Dollars...

In 2007 Barak Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Schumer voted for this.

In 2009 Barak Obama and Democrats passed a $1 trillion failed Stimulus Bill that contained 7,000 Democratic Party-Only PORK that spent MORE that $5 Billion in Pork, which included money (requested and agreed upon by Democrats) to pay for a 'research project' that studied why the sex life of a homosexual Argentinian male was 'better' than that of a heterosexual US male...putting the most advanced storm windows in a Ranger Station scheduled to be demolished 8 months later, 'shrimp on a treadmill', etc ...

--- LET THAT SINK IN: DEMOCRATS BELIEVE / BELIEVED FINDING OUT WHY THE SEX LIFE OF AN ARGENTINIAN MALE IS BETTER THAN A US HETEROSEXUAL MALE is / was more important that agreeing to $5 Billion towards ensuring our sovereignty, securing our borders, and protecting US citizens.

Democrats just agreed to a deal to send MORE THAN TWICE what the President is asking for to Argentina, Venezuela, Mexico, etc... corrupt nations that do not use it to improve their nation and improve things for their citizens, nations who facilitate the continued illegal migration and attempted invasion of their people into the United States...

What would be a good response by the Democrats?

STOP STANDING WITH VIOLENT ILLEGALS, CORRUPT FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS, MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS, HUMAN TRAFFICKERS, FEDERAL LAW-VIOLATING SANCTUARY CITIES, AND START SIDING WITH / REPRESENTING THE AMERICAN CITIZENS WHO ELECTED THAM AND WHO THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE REPRESENTING.

Do you think that approach would change their mind?
.

 

[rightwinger]

We can always look at all the compromises Republicans offered Obama..... none

Trump deserves no funding

And playing politics?? What could be worse than how the republican scum got their SC guy on the court? Hopefully that pos McConnell burns in hell

Republicans have a lot of payback due on that one

 

[edward37]

Everyone knows that 56b is chump change when it comes to government spending. Obama gave that much to dying solar companies. Democrats don't care about the Wall. They will stonewall (pardon the pun) everything the President tries to do for the next two years.

Maybe you can show us your posts of displeasure when that scumbag McConnell did the same to Obama?

Please list those things that were denied the obamaturd! Waiting.

START with Obamas SC pick and then
Republicans Stopped Sabotaging the Economy Because They Have the White House Now
By Jonathan Chait@jonathanchait

President Barack Obama talks with President-elect Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, Thursday, November 10, 2016.

During the Obama era, Democrats frequently believed, but only rarely uttered aloud in official forums, that the Republican Party was engaged in economic sabotage. Not a coldly conscious plot, exactly. But it seemed just a little too convenient that the party had reversed its fiscal ideology at precisely the time when doing so would damage Democrats and thereby smooth the GOP’s return to power.

Now that Republicans have reversed their position once again, also in a way that happens to redound to their political benefit, the answer seems a little more clear. Republicans have used their control of government to virtually double the budget deficit, which had been hovering around half a trillion dollars per year, and will now likely run well over $1 trillion — during the peak of an economic expansion. There is no economic rationale for this behavior. Their policy is simply to support fiscal contraction under Democratic presidents and fiscal expansion under Republican ones. Cynicism is the only basis to explain their behavior.

During the Bush administration, the party followed Dick Cheney’s famous dictum, “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter,” as a basic guide. Republicans financed two large tax cuts, a Medicare prescription-drug benefit, two wars, and a large domestic-security hike entirely through higher borrowing.

Importantly, in addition to supporting permanent deficit increases, they also supported temporary deficit increases in order to ward off recessions. When the economy slowed in 2001, Republicans supported a Democratic plan to mail out short-term tax credits. Here, they were following the perfectly sound logic of Keynesian economics, which held that during a recession, the government should boost demand by temporarily increasing the deficit. Even committed right-wing ideologues like Grover Norquist and Paul Ryansupported fiscal stimulus explicitly on these grounds. (“I like my porridge hot,” said Ryan at one hearing, explaining why he agreed with the Keynesian arguments made by Republican economist Kevin Hassett that it was vital to inject demand into the economy as quickly as possible.)

When the economy entered another recession at the end of Bush’s second term, Republicans again overwhelmingly supported another temporary stimulus bill. In February of 2008, Congress voted, by margins of 380 to 24 and 81 to 16, to mail out flat checks to every American household in order to stimulate more spending. “This is the Senate at its finest, recognizing this was an opportunity to demonstrate to the public that we could come together, do something important for the country and do it quickly,” said a satisfied Mitch McConnell.

 

[tyroneweaver]

This is politics, after all. Give and take. Or at least that USED to be the rule, when we were sane.

What would be a good trade-off to write that check? Improved DACA status? Amnesty of some kind? Maybe another issue? Climate change funding?
.

dems would rather give 150b to terrorism and the iranians than border security and making americans safe.

 

[rightwinger]

This is politics, after all. Give and take. Or at least that USED to be the rule, when we were sane.

What would be a good trade-off to write that check? Improved DACA status? Amnesty of some kind? Maybe another issue? Climate change funding?
.

I would protect all the DACA people.

Then I would add the following:

Total repeal of the tax cut passed in 2017.
Total and proper funding and support of Obamacare.
Establish a new tax to pay for the wall and it's maintenance. Impose a 50% tax on all unearned income on those who receive 250 thousand and more in unearned income. Also impose a 50% tax on luxury items such as private jets, their fuel and hangers they're stored in.
There would be no building of a wall until the revenues to pay for it have been collected. No bonds sold or any sort of debt can be allowed to build that wall.

How about a fair flat tax of 25% so everyone has some skin in the game and it would stop jackasses like you from wanting to tax everyone else! Use the money we spend on illegals to pay for the wall no need for additional taxes! That’s all a brain dead democrat can think of is taxing the shit out of the earners!

Why is it that conservatives can scream they don't want their tax dollars paying for something but liberals can't do the same? Conservatives actually get their way too. There are things that conservatives have made it illegal for our federal tax dollars to pay for. Yet you expect to be the only ones who can do that.

I don't want a wall. The majority of the nation doesn't want a wall. WHY?

If you and trump want a wall pay for it. Don't make the rest of us pay for and don't add it to the national debt.

The rich get the most benefits from undocumented workers. They get cheap labor, they don't have to pay for any benefits or follow the labor laws of our nation. Deny the rich, build the wall.

If you really were serious about preventing undocumented workers you would support what will actually work. Hold the criminal employers accountable for the crimes they are committing by hiring those undocumented workers. Those criminal employers are reaping millions off the undocumented workers and us citizens. Yet you let them get away with those crimes.

If criminal employers were thrown in prison for at least a decade, their business destroyed and they're totally bankrupted, no employer would hire an undocumented worker. No American would lose a job to an undocumented worker and they would stop coming here. FALSE. THE ACLU HAS SUED DENYING EMPLOYERS THE RIGHT TO ASL. GIVE THE EMPLOYER A FULL PROOF METHOD OF VERIFYING CITIZENSHIP THEN SPEW YOUR BULLSHIT ABOUT ARRESTING THEM.

If there's no job, they won't come.

Instead you want to let those criminals keep getting away with their crimes and to keep getting filthy rich off their crimes.

THE CRIMINALS ARE THE ILLEGALS. UNTIL EWE GIVE ENPLOYERS A FULLPROOF WAY OF VERIFICATION OF CITIZENSHIP1

Use e Verify

If you get caught using illegal labor, you go to jail

Until Republicans are willing to do that, they cant be taken seriously

 

[joaquinmiller]

This is politics, after all. Give and take. Or at least that USED to be the rule, when we were sane.

What would be a good trade-off to write that check? Improved DACA status? Amnesty of some kind? Maybe another issue? Climate change funding?
.

Where is the SANITY in wasting $5B on a political stunt that you KNOW won't do anything to curb the problem you say you're stopping?

The political stunt is refusing to fund the wall because it would mean Trump’s core campaign promise was build a wall.

That wasn't the complete promise. The complete promise was a political stunt.

 

[Richard-H]

This is politics, after all. Give and take. Or at least that USED to be the rule, when we were sane.

What would be a good trade-off to write that check? Improved DACA status? Amnesty of some kind? Maybe another issue? Climate change funding?
.

$5B or any other amount for a wall is not up for negotiation.

The fact is that the wall is a really, really dumb idea. No responsible congress person would support it no matter what. It's throwing $5B away just to appease Trump's ego and NOTHING else.

A comprehensive plan for border security would be possible. That could include some sections of fencing along the border - but only where security professionals thought it was appropriate.

Of course there are already sections of fencing along the border - where security professionals thought it was appropriate...so VERY little additional fencing is needed.

This isn't about securing the border. This is about appeasing Trump's ego.

 

[WillowTree]

This is politics, after all. Give and take. Or at least that USED to be the rule, when we were sane.

What would be a good trade-off to write that check? Improved DACA status? Amnesty of some kind? Maybe another issue? Climate change funding?
.

dems would rather give 150b to terrorism and the iranians than border security and making americans safe.

Democrats seem to hate Americans. The obamaturd taught them that!

 

[skews13]

This is politics, after all. Give and take. Or at least that USED to be the rule, when we were sane.

What would be a good trade-off to write that check? Improved DACA status? Amnesty of some kind? Maybe another issue? Climate change funding?
.

Nothing. You don’t get something for committing extortion. This isnt a give and take. It’s s dereliction if duty.

Here’s the deal. Do your job and we might not vote you out of office.

 

[toobfreak]

You can’t trust Trump to follow through with a promise.

Meantime Trump has followed through on more promises than the last three presidents combined.

 

[WillowTree]

This is politics, after all. Give and take. Or at least that USED to be the rule, when we were sane.

What would be a good trade-off to write that check? Improved DACA status? Amnesty of some kind? Maybe another issue? Climate change funding?
.

I would protect all the DACA people.

Then I would add the following:

Total repeal of the tax cut passed in 2017.
Total and proper funding and support of Obamacare.
Establish a new tax to pay for the wall and it's maintenance. Impose a 50% tax on all unearned income on those who receive 250 thousand and more in unearned income. Also impose a 50% tax on luxury items such as private jets, their fuel and hangers they're stored in.
There would be no building of a wall until the revenues to pay for it have been collected. No bonds sold or any sort of debt can be allowed to build that wall.

How about a fair flat tax of 25% so everyone has some skin in the game and it would stop jackasses like you from wanting to tax everyone else! Use the money we spend on illegals to pay for the wall no need for additional taxes! That’s all a brain dead democrat can think of is taxing the shit out of the earners!

Why is it that conservatives can scream they don't want their tax dollars paying for something but liberals can't do the same? Conservatives actually get their way too. There are things that conservatives have made it illegal for our federal tax dollars to pay for. Yet you expect to be the only ones who can do that.

I don't want a wall. The majority of the nation doesn't want a wall. WHY?

If you and trump want a wall pay for it. Don't make the rest of us pay for and don't add it to the national debt.

The rich get the most benefits from undocumented workers. They get cheap labor, they don't have to pay for any benefits or follow the labor laws of our nation. Deny the rich, build the wall.

If you really were serious about preventing undocumented workers you would support what will actually work. Hold the criminal employers accountable for the crimes they are committing by hiring those undocumented workers. Those criminal employers are reaping millions off the undocumented workers and us citizens. Yet you let them get away with those crimes.

If criminal employers were thrown in prison for at least a decade, their business destroyed and they're totally bankrupted, no employer would hire an undocumented worker. No American would lose a job to an undocumented worker and they would stop coming here. FALSE. THE ACLU HAS SUED DENYING EMPLOYERS THE RIGHT TO ASL. GIVE THE EMPLOYER A FULL PROOF METHOD OF VERIFYING CITIZENSHIP THEN SPEW YOUR BULLSHIT ABOUT ARRESTING THEM.

If there's no job, they won't come.

Instead you want to let those criminals keep getting away with their crimes and to keep getting filthy rich off their crimes.

THE CRIMINALS ARE THE ILLEGALS. UNTIL EWE GIVE ENPLOYERS A FULLPROOF WAY OF VERIFICATION OF CITIZENSHIP1

Use e Verify

If you get caught using illegal labor, you go to jail

Until Republicans are willing to do that, they cant be taken seriously

Until ewe stop the ACLU we cannot take ewe seriously


The 10 Big Problems with E-Verify

 

[rightwinger]

This is politics, after all. Give and take. Or at least that USED to be the rule, when we were sane.

What would be a good trade-off to write that check? Improved DACA status? Amnesty of some kind? Maybe another issue? Climate change funding?
.

Nothing. You don’t get something for committing extortion. This isnt a give and take. It’s s dereliction if duty.

Here’s the deal. Do your job and we might not vote you out of office.

Very true

Give in to Trumps extortion and it only encourages him to do it next time