Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wall and funding alternative

Collapse
X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by stratosaurus View Post
    Decided to post this as a new thread for responses. Since there appears to be no funding for trumps' wall..............

    Do you think pelosi/schumer/dems would agree, if trump drops the wall & ask that the $5.7 billion be directed toward expediting the deportation of illegal Immigrants currently in the U.S.?
    They have already offered tens of billions for additional security funding for ICE and Border patrol. He turned it down because it didnt have wall funding in it.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by HAMMER TOSS View Post

      You used the phrase "expediting deportation"...... to be used by a right wing fringe administration.

      yeah, I'm sure that wont be problematic at all.


      So you don't have kids? The hardship to federal employees and their families is squarely at the feet of trump, and his lackey gop. Reasonable people understand this.
      Sorry, but I have never discussed my personal life on this forum & will continue to do so, Reasonable people see fault in both side, Biased people see fault in only one side, Watch & as this fiasco continues to affect these people, you will see how quickly "reasonable" people can become quite unreasonable.

      btw......I see fault in both sides.
      Location: The Divided States of America
      ''All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"--Edmund Burke
      Man created science to create what man wants science to create.

      Comment


      • #18
        As early as April of 2018, the Trump admin released a two-page memo detailing a proposal to have Mexico pay for the wall through a process known as a "remittance tax". Basically this strategy involves taxing all cash transfers between immigrants in the U.S. and their relatives in Mexico. In 2016, $30 billion in cash was sent to Mexico by Mexican Nationals living and working in the US.

        Comment


        • wallywanker
          wallywanker commented
          Editing a comment
          i like the zia - that's where i am...

      • #19
        I think it's safe to say the Donald has proved himself not to be trustworthy.

        the way out of this mess is for Congress to pass a bill authorizing the funding to reopen government.

        then when Donald vetoes it they override The veto.

        problem solved.

        and now that actual paychecks are being missed I think that Republican Congress Critters are going to be fading the Heat from their constituents.

        first a few cracks. Then the dam breaks.
        __________________________________________________

        Is This Thing On?

        https://soundcloud.com/tom-hicks888

        Comment


        • #20
          Originally posted by BA.Barcolounger View Post

          They have already offered tens of billions for additional security funding for ICE and Border patrol. He turned it down because it didnt have wall funding in it.
          trump had told them, before the offer, that he would not accept a bill that did not include wall funding.......and they offered absolutely nothing for the wall. Basically, what they did was political grandstanding in the simplest form. What he did was stick to his word/promise. WOW!, I betcha the dems were taken aback, that for once, trump was actually telling the truth, That's quite a feat for a habitual liar, isn't it?
          Location: The Divided States of America
          ''All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"--Edmund Burke
          Man created science to create what man wants science to create.

          Comment


          • moogerfooger
            moogerfooger commented
            Editing a comment
            Lololololololololol

        • #21
          Originally posted by stratosaurus View Post

          trump had told them, before the offer, that he would not accept a bill that did not include wall funding.......and they offered absolutely nothing for the wall. Basically, what they did was political grandstanding in the simplest form. What he did was stick to his word/promise. WOW!, I betcha the dems were taken aback, that for once, trump was actually telling the truth, That's quite a feat for a habitual liar, isn't it?
          Trump had 2 years with Republican control of congress to get his wall and he barely made a fuss about it. He's not trying to win a wall, he's trying to win a political battle while everything is crumbling around him. For the democrats to acquiesce now would be foolish. Trump has a history of folding when things don't go his way.
          https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...-folds/560948/
          __________________________________________________
          Politics are like sports, where both teams suck

          Maybe we can all just agree that Bush was stupid and Cheney was lying and call it a day. - guitarcapo

          Originally posted by Grumpy_Polecat View Post
          For the record: Hitler using gas to exterminate his presumed enemies does not equal the use of chemical weapons.
          Reprehensible as it was, gassing was a conventional and accepted method for execution at the time. It is a stretch to equivocate the two.

          Comment


          • E-money
            E-money commented
            Editing a comment
            Understood, but even less votes are there now to pass a bill for the wall. My point is that it's not about a wall, it's about a President trying to flex his muscles and intimidate the opposition.

          • RKW
            RKW commented
            Editing a comment
            Yes but if the intimidation is to leverage a concession on the wall, than that makes it about the wall. Shutting down the government is a legitimate tactic that has been employed by both parties in the past, and when it's been done, the President flexes his muscles and intimidates.

          • Tom Hicks
            Tom Hicks commented
            Editing a comment
            you're confusing the tactic of trying to get wall funding with the strategy of appeasing enough base voters to get reelected,

        • #22
          Originally posted by stratosaurus View Post

          Sorry, but I have never discussed my personal life on this forum & will continue to do so, Reasonable people see fault in both side, Biased people see fault in only one side, Watch & as this fiasco continues to affect these people, you will see how quickly "reasonable" people can become quite unreasonable.

          btw......I see fault in both sides.
          Border security is like any other issue the federal government has to address and fund - public health, public safety, public welfare. They are all funded to the extent they have been seen as a need and priority, for better or worse.

          Nothing changed with border security other than Trump claiming it's an emergency. The borders get billions upon billions already, and this year will be an increase in funding. That's how federal programs work.

          Not by a president holding the government hostage for billions so he can pander to his base. Border security IS an issue, and it's addressed every year. And the number of undocumented immigrants has been decreasing steadily. What is it an emergency now? Because DJT is campaigning for 2020, and he doesn't care how many federal employees are going without.

          It's a joke we are even arguing about whether it's an emergency or not. Pretty transparent what Trump is doing. Just like sending the military to the border - another con-man's publicity stunt.

          Comment


          • RKW
            RKW commented
            Editing a comment
            Ah but the issue has NOT been addressed in the past. History is replete with examples of Presidents unilaterally doing what congress will not do. That's called leadership. BTW, keeping a campaign promise is not pandering to the base.

          • HAMMER TOSS
            HAMMER TOSS commented
            Editing a comment
            It's a campaign stunt - open your eyes.

          • HAMMER TOSS
            HAMMER TOSS commented
            Editing a comment
            The promise was Mexico would pay - or do you you not remember/care about that promise?

        • #23
          Originally posted by Tom Hicks View Post
          I think it's safe to say the Donald has proved himself not to be trustworthy.

          the way out of this mess is for Congress to pass a bill authorizing the funding to reopen government.

          then when Donald vetoes it they override The veto.

          problem solved.

          and now that actual paychecks are being missed I think that Republican Congress Critters are going to be fading the Heat from their constituents.

          first a few cracks. Then the dam breaks.

          I don't see the republican support currently to give a 2/3 majority vote to override a veto. McConnell has already said the he won't even allow a bill on the floor, that the president will not sign. That's a far cry from "problem solved".
          You're assuming republican constituents are backing the premise that none of this is the fault of democrats.
          I am assuming both parties & constituents seem dug in on their "no compromise" stances.
          Problem exacerbated.
          Location: The Divided States of America
          ''All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"--Edmund Burke
          Man created science to create what man wants science to create.

          Comment


          • Tom Hicks
            Tom Hicks commented
            Editing a comment
            We shall see how long the GOP Congress Fades the heat of public disapproval.

        • #24
          This is how Mexico pays for the wall I guess - by the potus throwing a tantrum and demanding a raise in his allowance, or he'll shut down your government.

          Comment


          • RKW
            RKW commented
            Editing a comment
            Trump has donated his Presidential salary to various groups since taking office. To my knowledge, he has never demanded a raise "in his allowance". At a minimum, call we all agree to not lie in our discussions in PP?

          • stratosaurus
            stratosaurus commented
            Editing a comment
            Please try the quote button
            Last edited by stratosaurus; 01-12-2019, 05:46 PM.

        • #25
          Anything to stop the bleeding as far as I'm concerned but should include some walls in areas of high traffic but doubt those twits (Pelosi and Schumer) are willing to offer anything.
          "Plunk your Magic Twanger, Froggy". Andy Devine

          Comment


          • #26
            Originally posted by EdBega View Post
            Anything to stop the bleeding as far as I'm concerned but should include some walls in areas of high traffic but doubt those twits (Pelosi and Schumer) are willing to offer anything.

            I don't believe they're willing to offer anything either, but it is ignorance for both sides to sit at opposite end of the spectrum and talk about each other, but refuse to budge and talk to each other. It's about time for members of the house & senate to bypass their leadership and attempt to work something out.
            We've complained before about the former "do nothing legislators", but this bunch is pathetically a lot worse......ie....that would be both democrats & republicans.
            Last edited by stratosaurus; 01-12-2019, 07:04 PM.
            Location: The Divided States of America
            ''All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"--Edmund Burke
            Man created science to create what man wants science to create.

            Comment


            • #27
              Originally posted by stratosaurus View Post


              I don't believe they're willing to offer anything either, but it is ignorance for both sides to sit at opposite end of the spectrum and talk about each other, but refuse to budge and talk to each other. It's about time for members of the house & senate to bypass their leadership and attempt to work something out.
              We've complained before about the former "do nothing legislators", but this bunch is pathetically a lot worse......ie....that would be both democrats & republicans.
              Really irritating our do nothing legislators get paid for and are pretty much set for life after their disservices. I do think Trump would be more willing to negotiate though but probably would want some walls to be included to save face...
              "Plunk your Magic Twanger, Froggy". Andy Devine

              Comment


              • Tom Hicks
                Tom Hicks commented
                Editing a comment
                Trump didn't have the political leverage even when republicans controlled both the house and the Senate.

                And just recently he lost a lot of clout when dem's took the house.

                He picked this fight and I think he boxed himself in.

              • EdBega
                EdBega commented
                Editing a comment
                But also if he couldn't get anything done that's probably why he picked the fight in the first place being already boxed in?!

              • Tom Hicks
                Tom Hicks commented
                Editing a comment
                Think of it this way - the guy who claims to be a master negotiator and deal maker is actually very weak in this particular area.

                Tactics of bullying and intimidation which served him well in his business career have not served him well in his efforts at actual governing.

            • #28
              Originally posted by EdBega View Post

              Really irritating our do nothing legislators get paid for and are pretty much set for life after their disservices. I do think Trump would be more willing to negotiate though but probably would want some walls to be included to save face...
              I question whether the democrats are willing to negotiate at all. Even the democrat constituents here, seem to think they have the upper hand and are stedfast in their belief that they are untouchable, as far as blame goes. It would be pretty simple for trump to just mention , that due to the hardships placed on the government workers, that in an efforts to settle the stalemate, he is willing to negotiate funding for the wall., within reason. That would simply put the ball in the democrats court & force them to negotiate or not.
              Location: The Divided States of America
              ''All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"--Edmund Burke
              Man created science to create what man wants science to create.

              Comment


              • EdBega
                EdBega commented
                Editing a comment
                You'd make a lousy politician... way too logical

              • oldsoapbars
                oldsoapbars commented
                Editing a comment
                If Trumplethinskin was serious about the wall. Trump should propose getting his $5.7b for his wall in return for his resignation.

                A proposal more Americans would support than a donument

              • Tom Hicks
                Tom Hicks commented
                Editing a comment
                this was the point of the strategy of going on TV this past week.

                polling taken since shows he didn't move the needle though.

                so much for the blame the Democrats tactic...

            • #29
              Originally posted by HAMMER TOSS View Post
              This is how Mexico pays for the wall I guess - by the potus throwing a tantrum and demanding a raise in his allowance, or he'll shut down your government.

              Trump has donated his Presidential salary to various groups since taking office. To my knowledge, he has never demanded a raise "in his allowance". At a minimum, call we all agree to not lie in our discussions in PP?

              Comment


              • Tom Hicks
                Tom Hicks commented
                Editing a comment
                The presidential salary equates to how many days of grifting foreign diplomats at the Washington DC Hotel he owns the lease to?

                Looking at it from another point of view have you factored in the graft of trump directing the Republican party to spend money at his properties?

                Here's a pro tip about con men like Donald. They see you as the Mark.
                Last edited by Tom Hicks; 01-13-2019, 10:24 AM.

            • #30
              Originally posted by HAMMER TOSS View Post
              The promise was Mexico would pay - or do you you not remember/care about that promise?
              I remember that promise just like I remember him asking to have his allowance raised.

              In point of fact, Trump never said Mexico would pre-pay. As early as April of 2018, the Trump admin released a two-page memo detailing a proposal to have Mexico pay for the wall through a process known as a "remittance tax". Basically this strategy involves taxing all cash transfers between immigrants in the U.S. and their relatives in Mexico. In 2016, $30 billion in cash was sent to Mexico by Mexican Nationals living and working in the US.

              Comment


              • Tom Hicks
                Tom Hicks commented
                Editing a comment
                He use allowance as a metaphor for funding the wall.

                But you decided that an allowance is metaphor for his presidential salary.

                And now you're complaining to him about your interpretation of what he meant.

                That's about as close as an example to having your cake and eating it too as I've ever seen.
                🤨
            Working...
            X