White House Unreasonable On Budget Deal

[The Original Tree]

shut it down and LEAVE it shut down.

Let it expire. President Trump should have never extended the deadline.

He didn't. The Courts extended it. And they may again, we'll see.

Exactly how and why can a Court Extend an Executive Order?

I don't think they are even allowed to do this. The President can, and he did extend it, but the Courts cannot extend an Expiring Executive Order.

 

[nat4900]

That's what was said last November.

He won 30 states and he'll keep those states which will give him 55
Senate Seats, and continued control of the House.

No doubt, there will be some right wing tears shed this Nov.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

shut it down and LEAVE it shut down.

Let it expire. President Trump should have never extended the deadline.

He didn't. The Courts extended it. And they may again, we'll see.

Exactly how and why can a Court Extend an Executive Order?

I don't think they are even allowed to do this. The President can, and he did extend it, but the Courts cannot extend an Expiring Executive Order.

If the order was constitutional and without the order it would be unconstitutional then the Courts can rule to extend it. That is a shot across the bow for Congress and the President to make it a law.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Trump ist rying to run the executive branch like a business. What he doesn't understand is that Congress can go over and around him if 2/3rds of them vote against him. He doesn't have the last word... Congress does.

Not just Congress. The States and the Supreme Court as well. As it stands, look for the States to start talking about a Continental Congress if this continues. Yes, it hasn't happened since the 30s but it is a possibility unless Congress and POTUS start getting their act together.

You mean a {shudder} Constitutional Convention? Man o man I hope not. The entire Constitution could be changed. That would be a frightening prospect.

Yes, that is what I meant. The brain didn't quite engage. There are talks of one anyway dealing with term limits in congress. There is over 20 states that have already ruled on it. They need 34. The pieces of the puzzle are in place. And yes, it's meant to be scary, real scary. So while the power hungry are "Ruling" in Washington, a reminder is necessary.

There are already more than 600 requests form 49 States in the congressional record and congress hasn't called a convention yet. What makes you think another 30 or 40 requests will make a difference?


.

Not request. You need 34 hard core laws passed by the states to qualify. You can request until you are blue in the face. Colorado tried that in the 90s to limit their own Washington Reps. It was struck down by the Supreme Court. Even after the chicken SH$$s all claimed to support it whom the State sent to congress. They even signed papers stating that they would adhere to it even if it was over turned. The Lying sacks of dog doody totally disregarded their signed promises.

 

[JQPublic1]

Trump ist rying to run the executive branch like a business. What he doesn't understand is that Congress can go over and around him if 2/3rds of them vote against him. He doesn't have the last word... Congress does.

LMAO, they won't have the votes.


.

We the people can bring considerable pressure on our Congressional hired help to do their jobs...especially using the 2020 elections as leverage. A government shut down will bring people out of the wood work, most who live from paycheck to paycheck. When those paychecks stop coming in and government services stop...
we will see who really runs this country.

The vast majority of Americans are unaffected by a partial shut down. If you've been watching the news this morning, it looks less likely immigration will be included in the spending bill and members of the house are looking for a longer term bill.


.

I think in some ways everyone will be affected to some degree. If people don;'t get their social security checks and federal pension checks there could be far reaching consequences that go beyond the plight of beneficiaries.

Those checks will always go out.

How do you know? The government has never been shut down before. What precedent are you citing?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

LMAO, they won't have the votes.


.

We the people can bring considerable pressure on our Congressional hired help to do their jobs...especially using the 2020 elections as leverage. A government shut down will bring people out of the wood work, most who live from paycheck to paycheck. When those paychecks stop coming in and government services stop...
we will see who really runs this country.

The vast majority of Americans are unaffected by a partial shut down. If you've been watching the news this morning, it looks less likely immigration will be included in the spending bill and members of the house are looking for a longer term bill.


.

I think in some ways everyone will be affected to some degree. If people don;'t get their social security checks and federal pension checks there could be far reaching consequences that go beyond the plight of beneficiaries.

Those checks will always go out.

How do you know? The government has never been shut down before. What precedent are you citing?

You must be no older than 4 years old and can only say, "In My Life Time" at that.

1981, 84, 86, 90, 95, and 2013.

 

[blackhawk]

So Trump is supposed to give some type of amnesty deal on DACA for the promise that illegal immigration and border security will be addressed later we have seen this movie before and it always ends the same way with nothing happening with illegal immigration and border security. I will support a way to find a pathway to citizenship for these dreamers but not for empty promises again if the Democrats truly want these problems dealt with then they are going to have give something as well.

 

[JQPublic1]

You are half right. The Congress controls the purse strings, but doesn't micro-manage. Congress did separate essential and none essential, but the heads of each agency control who goes home.

The President can't borrow from China. Congress does that.

If Martial Law is ever declared the president can do just about any damn thing he pleases. He just has to have a very good reason for implementing ML.

How do you know when a regressive is losing an argument?

Answer: When they shift the conversation to the absurd.


.

Nothing is off the table where Trump is concerned. He would orchestrate a reason to declare Martial Law in a heartbeat if it meant saving his ass from Mueller's investigation. Once that occurs he could then befree to do anything in the interest of national security to include borrow money. Thats the minor secondary point I was making in a broader discussion.... if you attach importance to that as central to the main argument be my guest.... It doesn't mean a thing.

So you try to justify the absurd with more absurdity? LMAO


.

I can't tell if JQ is serious.

Trump can't do anything without some judge declaring it "unconstitutional".

If Martial Law is declared for any reason the Constitution is suspended!

 

[JQPublic1]

We the people can bring considerable pressure on our Congressional hired help to do their jobs...especially using the 2020 elections as leverage. A government shut down will bring people out of the wood work, most who live from paycheck to paycheck. When those paychecks stop coming in and government services stop...
we will see who really runs this country.

The vast majority of Americans are unaffected by a partial shut down. If you've been watching the news this morning, it looks less likely immigration will be included in the spending bill and members of the house are looking for a longer term bill.


.

I think in some ways everyone will be affected to some degree. If people don;'t get their social security checks and federal pension checks there could be far reaching consequences that go beyond the plight of beneficiaries.

Those checks will always go out.

How do you know? The government has never been shut down before. What precedent are you citing?

You must be no older than 4 years old and can only say, "In My Life Time" at that.

1981, 84, 86, 90, 95, and 2013.

We the people can bring considerable pressure on our Congressional hired help to do their jobs...especially using the 2020 elections as leverage. A government shut down will bring people out of the wood work, most who live from paycheck to paycheck. When those paychecks stop coming in and government services stop...
we will see who really runs this country.

The vast majority of Americans are unaffected by a partial shut down. If you've been watching the news this morning, it looks less likely immigration will be included in the spending bill and members of the house are looking for a longer term bill.


.

I think in some ways everyone will be affected to some degree. If people don;'t get their social security checks and federal pension checks there could be far reaching consequences that go beyond the plight of beneficiaries.

Those checks will always go out.

How do you know? The government has never been shut down before. What precedent are you citing?

You must be no older than 4 years old and can only say, "In My Life Time" at that.

1981, 84, 86, 90, 95, and 2013.

I'm over 40 and then some. When did the government shut down?

 

[JQPublic1]

Um... The house holds the purse strings...They decide what comes in and out of the treasury. All the President can do is borrow from China or some other entity if the House refuses to fund anything...but I believe there is a congressional precedent that established minimal payments to keep essential services going...

You are half right. The Congress controls the purse strings, but doesn't micro-manage. Congress did separate essential and none essential, but the heads of each agency control who goes home.

The President can't borrow from China. Congress does that.

If Martial Law is ever declared the president can do just about any damn thing he pleases. He just has to have a very good reason for implementing ML.

How do you know when a regressive is losing an argument?

Answer: When they shift the conversation to the absurd.


.

Nothing is off the table where Trump is concerned. He would orchestrate a reason to declare Martial Law in a heartbeat if it meant saving his ass from Mueller's investigation. Once that occurs he could then befree to do anything in the interest of national security to include borrow money. Thats the minor secondary point I was making in a broader discussion.... if you attach importance to that as central to the main argument be my guest.... It doesn't mean a thing.

So you try to justify the absurd with more absurdity? LMAO


.

Wha is absurd about this earlier response from me... this was the issue at hand before you deflected on a side note.

"The house holds the purse strings...They decide what comes in and out of the treasury. All the President can do is borrow from China or some other entity if the House refuses to fund anything ...but I believe there is a congressional precedent that established minimal payments to keep essential services going."

 

[OKTexas]

Trump ist rying to run the executive branch like a business. What he doesn't understand is that Congress can go over and around him if 2/3rds of them vote against him. He doesn't have the last word... Congress does.

Not just Congress. The States and the Supreme Court as well. As it stands, look for the States to start talking about a Continental Congress if this continues. Yes, it hasn't happened since the 30s but it is a possibility unless Congress and POTUS start getting their act together.

You mean a {shudder} Constitutional Convention? Man o man I hope not. The entire Constitution could be changed. That would be a frightening prospect.

Yes, that is what I meant. The brain didn't quite engage. There are talks of one anyway dealing with term limits in congress. There is over 20 states that have already ruled on it. They need 34. The pieces of the puzzle are in place. And yes, it's meant to be scary, real scary. So while the power hungry are "Ruling" in Washington, a reminder is necessary.

There are already more than 600 requests form 49 States in the congressional record and congress hasn't called a convention yet. What makes you think another 30 or 40 requests will make a difference?


.

Not request. You need 34 hard core laws passed by the states to qualify. You can request until you are blue in the face. Colorado tried that in the 90s to limit their own Washington Reps. It was struck down by the Supreme Court. Even after the chicken SH$$s all claimed to support it whom the State sent to congress. They even signed papers stating that they would adhere to it even if it was over turned. The Lying sacks of dog doody totally disregarded their signed promises.

Every one was passed by the State legislatures, that's all Article 5 requires.


.

 

[OKTexas]

If Martial Law is ever declared the president can do just about any damn thing he pleases. He just has to have a very good reason for implementing ML.

How do you know when a regressive is losing an argument?

Answer: When they shift the conversation to the absurd.


.

Nothing is off the table where Trump is concerned. He would orchestrate a reason to declare Martial Law in a heartbeat if it meant saving his ass from Mueller's investigation. Once that occurs he could then befree to do anything in the interest of national security to include borrow money. Thats the minor secondary point I was making in a broader discussion.... if you attach importance to that as central to the main argument be my guest.... It doesn't mean a thing.

So you try to justify the absurd with more absurdity? LMAO


.

I can't tell if JQ is serious.

Trump can't do anything without some judge declaring it "unconstitutional".

If Martial Law is declared for any reason the Constitution is suspended!

There are no provisions in the Constitution for that to happen.


.

 

[OKTexas]

You are half right. The Congress controls the purse strings, but doesn't micro-manage. Congress did separate essential and none essential, but the heads of each agency control who goes home.

The President can't borrow from China. Congress does that.

If Martial Law is ever declared the president can do just about any damn thing he pleases. He just has to have a very good reason for implementing ML.

How do you know when a regressive is losing an argument?

Answer: When they shift the conversation to the absurd.


.

Nothing is off the table where Trump is concerned. He would orchestrate a reason to declare Martial Law in a heartbeat if it meant saving his ass from Mueller's investigation. Once that occurs he could then befree to do anything in the interest of national security to include borrow money. Thats the minor secondary point I was making in a broader discussion.... if you attach importance to that as central to the main argument be my guest.... It doesn't mean a thing.

So you try to justify the absurd with more absurdity? LMAO


.

Wha is absurd about this earlier response from me... this was the issue at hand before you deflected on a side note.

"The house holds the purse strings...They decide what comes in and out of the treasury. All the President can do is borrow from China or some other entity if the House refuses to fund anything ...but I believe there is a congressional precedent that established minimal payments to keep essential services going."

Last time dipshit, the president decides what is essential in a shutdown, the law gives him the authority to spend the money necessary to keep those departments going. If he chose he could declare everything is essential and keep everyone working. Congress would pay laid off employees anyways, so what's the difference?


.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Not just Congress. The States and the Supreme Court as well. As it stands, look for the States to start talking about a Continental Congress if this continues. Yes, it hasn't happened since the 30s but it is a possibility unless Congress and POTUS start getting their act together.

You mean a {shudder} Constitutional Convention? Man o man I hope not. The entire Constitution could be changed. That would be a frightening prospect.

Yes, that is what I meant. The brain didn't quite engage. There are talks of one anyway dealing with term limits in congress. There is over 20 states that have already ruled on it. They need 34. The pieces of the puzzle are in place. And yes, it's meant to be scary, real scary. So while the power hungry are "Ruling" in Washington, a reminder is necessary.

There are already more than 600 requests form 49 States in the congressional record and congress hasn't called a convention yet. What makes you think another 30 or 40 requests will make a difference?


.

Not request. You need 34 hard core laws passed by the states to qualify. You can request until you are blue in the face. Colorado tried that in the 90s to limit their own Washington Reps. It was struck down by the Supreme Court. Even after the chicken SH$$s all claimed to support it whom the State sent to congress. They even signed papers stating that they would adhere to it even if it was over turned. The Lying sacks of dog doody totally disregarded their signed promises.

Every one was passed by the State legislatures, that's all Article 5 requires.


.

I happen to be a member for term limits. And I can tell you that the total number of states with the laws ready to go is 24 but it requires 34. Usually, it's struck down by either the state congress or a state court. Just like the one for Colorado in 1994 which was overturned by the Supreme Court. A State can pass (and many have) passed term limits for the state and below offices but it takes a full blown Constitutional Congress to change or add to the US Constitution. The problem is, at federal level, we have way too many career politicians that have way too much influence at local level. If you want to go for Federal Congressional Limits you pretty well kiss off your own chance of being elected. The two parties find it poison.

 

[Spare_change]

Raj Shah when appearing on the CNN Chris Cuomo show last night really gave the impression that the White House is being completely unreasonable about the Budget negotiations. Everyone knows that the Democrats have conditioned their necessary support for such a bill on getting a DACA deal. Mr. Shah statements on this issue indicated the President needs to have a long list of issues satisfactorily addressed for him to sign the budget bill. Mr. Shah's indications are the bill has to have things like an increase in the number of border patrol agents, a new removal system that expedites the deportation of foreigners illegally found to be in the U.S. besides the wall, stopping chain migration and cessation of the diversity lottery program. This is completely unreasonable, it is too extensive of a bill. The Democrats are only looking for legalization and a path to citizenship for childhood arrivals and the White house in return wants an agreement to a long wish list of major concessions for Democrats. What the White House is talking about is a comprehensive immigration reform bill and then from the Democrat standpoint you're talking about legalization for the eleven million illegal immigrants in America many that have been here for decades. The White House is guaranteeing a government shut down with talk like this!



Raj on this program concisely gave President Trump's position on the legal immigration issue when he said the President wants only a merit based system a system that only takes the best and the brightest. This is not virtuous. This is not what great Presidents, great citizens and great Republicans like President Ronald Reagan would advocate. Most American citizens ancestors who emigrated to America only offered manual labor but they were good people who made citizens with good character and help make America an example for the world. Many countries throughout the world because of their economic predicament don't have a very good education system and because of those facts their citizens who want to emigrate to America don't have skills but those people often have more valuable assets the character to work hard and the courage to build businesses and they bring those assets to America and end up making a significant positive impact in America. President Trump's course wants to ignore this reality to America's great detriment from both a country character standpoint and a country practical benefit standpoint, I'd venture to guess the vast majority of the American people don't want this course because they see this loss and hope it is not put into law!

This is what happens when you don't understand reality .....

Trump did NOT put conditions on the budget deal. In fact, he has been very consistent about saying that if you bring him a clean budget deal, he will sign it.

The Democrats, on the other hand, want to add DACA to the budget deal.

Trump then said, well, if you want DACA in the bill, then you also need to address border security, chain migration, and the visa lottery.

If Dems leave DACA out of the budget bill, it gets signed. If they want it in there, they have to be prepared to toss in the stuff Trump wants.

Frankly, I strongly suspect Trump is hoping that the Dems shut down the government - the political fallout would be catastrophic.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The vast majority of Americans are unaffected by a partial shut down. If you've been watching the news this morning, it looks less likely immigration will be included in the spending bill and members of the house are looking for a longer term bill.


.

I think in some ways everyone will be affected to some degree. If people don;'t get their social security checks and federal pension checks there could be far reaching consequences that go beyond the plight of beneficiaries.

Those checks will always go out.

How do you know? The government has never been shut down before. What precedent are you citing?

You must be no older than 4 years old and can only say, "In My Life Time" at that.

1981, 84, 86, 90, 95, and 2013.

The vast majority of Americans are unaffected by a partial shut down. If you've been watching the news this morning, it looks less likely immigration will be included in the spending bill and members of the house are looking for a longer term bill.


.

I think in some ways everyone will be affected to some degree. If people don;'t get their social security checks and federal pension checks there could be far reaching consequences that go beyond the plight of beneficiaries.

Those checks will always go out.

How do you know? The government has never been shut down before. What precedent are you citing?

You must be no older than 4 years old and can only say, "In My Life Time" at that.

1981, 84, 86, 90, 95, and 2013.

I'm over 40 and then some. When did the government shut down?

Then you live under a rock in a cave. In 2013, our Monuments closed for business. The Federals all went home. Since this area is almost totally dependent on tourist trade, it cost millions of dollars in revenue. There were no permits issued, no tours and chains across the entrances with no on at the entrances. It was only for a few days but tourists found other places to go and it wasn't here. You seem to think it only affects the Federal Worker. But it is devastating to the local economy in the tourist areas. We depend on those Monuments. Right down to the local restaurants, quicky marts and hotels/motels. And the spin on that, the folks working in those places have their hours cut and the Owners take quite a bite in profits.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Raj Shah when appearing on the CNN Chris Cuomo show last night really gave the impression that the White House is being completely unreasonable about the Budget negotiations. Everyone knows that the Democrats have conditioned their necessary support for such a bill on getting a DACA deal. Mr. Shah statements on this issue indicated the President needs to have a long list of issues satisfactorily addressed for him to sign the budget bill. Mr. Shah's indications are the bill has to have things like an increase in the number of border patrol agents, a new removal system that expedites the deportation of foreigners illegally found to be in the U.S. besides the wall, stopping chain migration and cessation of the diversity lottery program. This is completely unreasonable, it is too extensive of a bill. The Democrats are only looking for legalization and a path to citizenship for childhood arrivals and the White house in return wants an agreement to a long wish list of major concessions for Democrats. What the White House is talking about is a comprehensive immigration reform bill and then from the Democrat standpoint you're talking about legalization for the eleven million illegal immigrants in America many that have been here for decades. The White House is guaranteeing a government shut down with talk like this!



Raj on this program concisely gave President Trump's position on the legal immigration issue when he said the President wants only a merit based system a system that only takes the best and the brightest. This is not virtuous. This is not what great Presidents, great citizens and great Republicans like President Ronald Reagan would advocate. Most American citizens ancestors who emigrated to America only offered manual labor but they were good people who made citizens with good character and help make America an example for the world. Many countries throughout the world because of their economic predicament don't have a very good education system and because of those facts their citizens who want to emigrate to America don't have skills but those people often have more valuable assets the character to work hard and the courage to build businesses and they bring those assets to America and end up making a significant positive impact in America. President Trump's course wants to ignore this reality to America's great detriment from both a country character standpoint and a country practical benefit standpoint, I'd venture to guess the vast majority of the American people don't want this course because they see this loss and hope it is not put into law!

This is what happens when you don't understand reality .....

Trump did NOT put conditions on the budget deal. In fact, he has been very consistent about saying that if you bring him a clean budget deal, he will sign it.

The Democrats, on the other hand, want to add DACA to the budget deal.

Trump then said, well, if you want DACA in the bill, then you also need to address border security, chain migration, and the visa lottery.

If Dems leave DACA out of the budget bill, it gets signed. If they want it in there, they have to be prepared to toss in the stuff Trump wants.

Frankly, I strongly suspect Trump is hoping that the Dems shut down the government - the political fallout would be catastrophic.

I did a search. Outside of DACA, you will find the Dems are quite agreeable until you pile on the shopping list that trump demands to be added. There is so much information out there that I don't even know where to start. Even the Reps are having trouble with much of Trumps demands.

Trump: in order to include DACA

1. The Wall necessary
2. Change the Visas to Merit only
3. I won't go any further. It's quite a list that will NEVER be passed in Congress.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Trump ist rying to run the executive branch like a business. What he doesn't understand is that Congress can go over and around him if 2/3rds of them vote against him. He doesn't have the last word... Congress does.

LMAO, they won't have the votes.


.

We the people can bring considerable pressure on our Congressional hired help to do their jobs...especially using the 2020 elections as leverage. A government shut down will bring people out of the wood work, most who live from paycheck to paycheck. When those paychecks stop coming in and government services stop...
we will see who really runs this country.

The vast majority of Americans are unaffected by a partial shut down. If you've been watching the news this morning, it looks less likely immigration will be included in the spending bill and members of the house are looking for a longer term bill.


.

I think in some ways everyone will be affected to some degree. If people don;'t get their social security checks and federal pension checks there could be far reaching consequences that go beyond the plight of beneficiaries.

You act like we never had a shut down before, what are you 12 years old?

 

[Wyatt earp]

The vast majority of Americans are unaffected by a partial shut down. If you've been watching the news this morning, it looks less likely immigration will be included in the spending bill and members of the house are looking for a longer term bill.


.

I think in some ways everyone will be affected to some degree. If people don;'t get their social security checks and federal pension checks there could be far reaching consequences that go beyond the plight of beneficiaries.

Those checks will always go out.

How do you know? The government has never been shut down before. What precedent are you citing?

You must be no older than 4 years old and can only say, "In My Life Time" at that.

1981, 84, 86, 90, 95, and 2013.

The vast majority of Americans are unaffected by a partial shut down. If you've been watching the news this morning, it looks less likely immigration will be included in the spending bill and members of the house are looking for a longer term bill.


.

I think in some ways everyone will be affected to some degree. If people don;'t get their social security checks and federal pension checks there could be far reaching consequences that go beyond the plight of beneficiaries.

Those checks will always go out.

How do you know? The government has never been shut down before. What precedent are you citing?

You must be no older than 4 years old and can only say, "In My Life Time" at that.

1981, 84, 86, 90, 95, and 2013.

I'm over 40 and then some. When did the government shut down?

It just shut down 4 years ago you moron and shut down like 5 times during regean

 

[Avatar4321]

Raj Shah when appearing on the CNN Chris Cuomo show last night really gave the impression that the White House is being completely unreasonable about the Budget negotiations. Everyone knows that the Democrats have conditioned their necessary support for such a bill on getting a DACA deal. Mr. Shah statements on this issue indicated the President needs to have a long list of issues satisfactorily addressed for him to sign the budget bill. Mr. Shah's indications are the bill has to have things like an increase in the number of border patrol agents, a new removal system that expedites the deportation of foreigners illegally found to be in the U.S. besides the wall, stopping chain migration and cessation of the diversity lottery program. This is completely unreasonable, it is too extensive of a bill. The Democrats are only looking for legalization and a path to citizenship for childhood arrivals and the White house in return wants an agreement to a long wish list of major concessions for Democrats. What the White House is talking about is a comprehensive immigration reform bill and then from the Democrat standpoint you're talking about legalization for the eleven million illegal immigrants in America many that have been here for decades. The White House is guaranteeing a government shut down with talk like this!



Raj on this program concisely gave President Trump's position on the legal immigration issue when he said the President wants only a merit based system a system that only takes the best and the brightest. This is not virtuous. This is not what great Presidents, great citizens and great Republicans like President Ronald Reagan would advocate. Most American citizens ancestors who emigrated to America only offered manual labor but they were good people who made citizens with good character and help make America an example for the world. Many countries throughout the world because of their economic predicament don't have a very good education system and because of those facts their citizens who want to emigrate to America don't have skills but those people often have more valuable assets the character to work hard and the courage to build businesses and they bring those assets to America and end up making a significant positive impact in America. President Trump's course wants to ignore this reality to America's great detriment from both a country character standpoint and a country practical benefit standpoint, I'd venture to guess the vast majority of the American people don't want this course because they see this loss and hope it is not put into law!

So what you're saying is the commiecrats want to hold a whole nation of 320,000,000 citizens hostage to benefit 800,000 illegals, right? There's no reason DACA has to be included in the spending bill, they have till March to address it.


.

It's not DACA that Trump finds bad. It's the fact his Shopping List is not in the bill. And most of his shopping list is just terrible. It's not the Dems that are holding the nation hostage and it isn't even the Reps that are. It's Trump. What the hell else did you expect.

So what your saying is he wants to work on his agenda. The one he was elected to do.

Yeah totally unreasonable. Doesn't he know the losers get their agenda

Unless of course the losers are republican. Then so long suckers