4 ms·

Am I the only one who reads this as a fairly biased piece of journalism? I see a lot of quotes, speculation, and sources but not a lot of information. This is

by bargl 8y ago

Am I the only one who reads this as a fairly biased piece of journalism? I see a lot of quotes, speculation, and sources but not a lot of information. This is a bandaid. They have 3 weeks to do something they couldn't do while under immense pressure. I hope they figure it out, but that requires the moderates to get together and start working against the extreme edges of each party. Trump will not lose this battle and neither will Pelosi. They either have to figure out a way for them both to win, or the middle has to break away. I would love to be wrong, but I can't see a path forward through congress unless people compromise.

lucd 8y ago
Trump already lost.
JohnTHaller 8y ago
The House already approved the budget without border wall financing that the Senate approved back in December, but the Republican Senate has changed their mind and now won't approve it. Trump, of course, won't approve it without his useless portion of a border fence, so the government will shut down again in 3 weeks. This temporary opening of the government was likely to distract from the fact that Roger Stone was indicted today.
- bargl 8y ago
  Do you see any way that Democrats could have come to the table and negotiated to end this? Do you think they should have compromised to end shutdown? Compromised as in, funding the wall but putting money for increased bandwidh for asylum seekers. Permanent status for DACA recipients. What would you accept personally? Obviously the Senate changed between December and Jan. Just as obviously things have changed since Obama proposed a wall. It has become a political mouthpiece. Democrats would put funding out there if it wasn't a wall just to make Trump lose and he won't let that happen. It is about each side wanting to win, and we lose. His justification for the wall is bullshit, but there are a lot of Republican pundits out there who have solid reasoning behind the wall with some (albiet questionable) data to support it There is an estimate that immigration costs the US 116b per year, with another more conservative estimate at ~60b. Both agreeing that there is a cost to illegal imigrants on the system. The highest cost being on educating the youth, which then as naturalized citizens become tax payers. Speculation on the data from the lower estimate is that this is also a wash. This is what I was able to dig up but I'm sure there is even more nuance to these arguments. I'd suggest you go dig too and don't take my word for it. What I want to see - A bill proposing a wall, but also an increased and reformed immigration policy that allows low wage workers a path to the USA without needing to be asylum seekers. I'd like to see us make it easier for people from the southern border to come in and find a place and pay taxes. That gives us teh ability to vet migrants in a systemic way (and secure), but also fight the negative birth rate in the US. Edit, I also want you to know while we can disagree I think conversation is good. I by no means support Trump, I think he's a black stain on the Republican party. It's disgusting. But I try to look at each thing he does outside of the rhetoric he spews, which is honestly very hard. .

by bargl 8y ago

lucd 8y ago

Trump already lost.

JohnTHaller 8y ago

The House already approved the budget without border wall financing that the Senate approved back in December, but the Republican Senate has changed their mind and now won't approve it. Trump, of course, won't approve it without his useless portion of a border fence, so the government will shut down again in 3 weeks. This temporary opening of the government was likely to distract from the fact that Roger Stone was indicted today.

bargl 8y ago
Do you see any way that Democrats could have come to the table and negotiated to end this? Do you think they should have compromised to end shutdown? Compromised as in, funding the wall but putting money for increased bandwidh for asylum seekers. Permanent status for DACA recipients. What would you accept personally? Obviously the Senate changed between December and Jan. Just as obviously things have changed since Obama proposed a wall. It has become a political mouthpiece. Democrats would put funding out there if it wasn't a wall just to make Trump lose and he won't let that happen. It is about each side wanting to win, and we lose. His justification for the wall is bullshit, but there are a lot of Republican pundits out there who have solid reasoning behind the wall with some (albiet questionable) data to support it There is an estimate that immigration costs the US 116b per year, with another more conservative estimate at ~60b. Both agreeing that there is a cost to illegal imigrants on the system. The highest cost being on educating the youth, which then as naturalized citizens become tax payers. Speculation on the data from the lower estimate is that this is also a wash. This is what I was able to dig up but I'm sure there is even more nuance to these arguments. I'd suggest you go dig too and don't take my word for it. What I want to see - A bill proposing a wall, but also an increased and reformed immigration policy that allows low wage workers a path to the USA without needing to be asylum seekers. I'd like to see us make it easier for people from the southern border to come in and find a place and pay taxes. That gives us teh ability to vet migrants in a systemic way (and secure), but also fight the negative birth rate in the US. Edit, I also want you to know while we can disagree I think conversation is good. I by no means support Trump, I think he's a black stain on the Republican party. It's disgusting. But I try to look at each thing he does outside of the rhetoric he spews, which is honestly very hard. .