Red Mosquito

these pictures are precious

the blank desk and phone shot will go down in history

Nearly a laugh but really a cry

I knew Ed and Chris were close, but:

https://www.alternativenation.net/eddie ... ent-trump/

Goddamn Alternative Nation is a shitty website

I...wh....what....

Bi_3 wrote:I knew Ed and Chris were close, but:

https://www.alternativenation.net/eddie ... ent-trump/

Pretty sure that Lily and Olivia are very close. Was some stuff about it when Chris died.

Openly lying about unpleasant truths for political gain while visiting the holy land is maximum Pence

Seems pretty clear that the backroom deal was "give us time to convince the White House that DACA is in their best interest." In a few weeks when the shutdown starts looming again, CHIP will be safe and Republicans will have already played their hand on DACA. Not a great bargaining position for them, and it makes this a much better play by Dems than the initial media assessments reflect.

Simple Torture wrote:For the love of god, someone tell me if bune has to go to work tomorrow.

I do. Er, did. We had enough money to last us four days.

McParadigm wrote:Seems pretty clear that the backroom deal was "give us time to convince the White House that DACA is in their best interest." In a few weeks when the shutdown starts looming again, CHIP will be safe and Republicans will have already played their hand on DACA. Not a great bargaining position for them, and it makes this a much better play by Dems than the initial media assessments reflect.

So not antagonizing Trump, but instead figuring out how to play him lead to a solution. Huh.

Bi_3 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:Seems pretty clear that the backroom deal was "give us time to convince the White House that DACA is in their best interest." In a few weeks when the shutdown starts looming again, CHIP will be safe and Republicans will have already played their hand on DACA. Not a great bargaining position for them, and it makes this a much better play by Dems than the initial media assessments reflect.

So not antagonizing Trump, but instead figuring out how to play him lead to a solution. Huh.

Please don't tell the emperor that he has no pants on

I just doubt that in three weeks Democrats will be willing to pull the trigger again on a shutdown, even if Mitch doesn't put anything to a vote. This seemed to be the time to do anything. I get the spot they were in; they bet on a shitty hand, but it was the only hand they had, and they did it for a good reason. But I just think banking on the notion that this country will be sympathetic to Dreamers is a losing bet, which is a pretty sad commentary on our country, but I think may be accurate.

Disagree. Democrats demonstrated a willingness to pull the trigger on a shut down, and polling showed that Republicans took more public blame for it. They then showed a willingness to deal, and made that deal very publicly, which will only expand the Republican-blaming if it happens again in a few weeks. Lastly, all of this is in favor of a goal that has >80% public support.

By contrast Republicans don't have a lot to threaten with. They took this quick win and are playing it for all its worth, but it was really just to open up the floor because Trump wouldn't deal if it looked like he capitulated. That's not a good long term negotiation platform. CHIP was the ace they had held in reserve, and they've spent it.

I'm deeply skeptical that Republican moderates can get their party on board for DACA, and I don't really see a path forward that isn't tragic, but I anticipate a lot more conflict in the next round, and frankly Republicans have a lot to lose if they burn the Dreamers right before some already-brutal midterms.

I think I just question how strong the support of Dreamers actually is. 80% of people support it, but I feel like that number plummets after a week of Trump word-vomiting that the Democrats are for amnesty. And I think Democrats would get far more of the blame if they tried to shutdown the government again, as Americans would feel they were repeating the same issues. I don't argue with the logic of what you're saying; allowing a DACA bill to proceed in the Senate would put the onus on the House, but I just don't think much of the public would view it that way, as irrational as their viewpoint may be.

McParadigm wrote:

what top men?

digster wrote:I think I just question how strong the support of Dreamers actually is. 80% of people support it, but I feel like that number plummets after a week of Trump word-vomiting that the Democrats are for amnesty. And I think Democrats would get far more of the blame if they tried to shutdown the government again, as Americans would feel they were repeating the same issues. I don't argue with the logic of what you're saying; allowing a DACA bill to proceed in the Senate would put the onus on the House, but I just don't think much of the public would view it that way, as irrational as their viewpoint may be.

I think support plummets when people are told that a pathway to citizenship for 'dreamers' means they get to immediately turn around and sponsor their parents (ie, the people that broke the law to begin with). DACA only works with no path to citizenship and potentially doing away with birthright citizenship, otherwise this just continues happening every generation.

This seems like an area where "moral hazard" applies.

digster wrote:80% of people support it, but I feel like that number plummets after a week of Trump word-vomiting that the Democrats are for amnesty.

simple schoolboy wrote:I think support plummets when people are told that a pathway to citizenship for 'dreamers' means they get to immediately turn around and sponsor their parents

The issue with both theories being, of course, that Dreamer protections and pathways have been above 75% support since at least August. You're both trying to explain an absent polling shift.

McParadigm wrote:

digster wrote:80% of people support it, but I feel like that number plummets after a week of Trump word-vomiting that the Democrats are for amnesty.

simple schoolboy wrote:I think support plummets when people are told that a pathway to citizenship for 'dreamers' means they get to immediately turn around and sponsor their parents

The issue with both theories being, of course, that Dreamer protections and pathways have been above 75% support since at least August. You're both trying to explain an absent polling shift.

I dunno... I think there is broad confusion about DACA (800k people) vs DREAMer (3.6m people) that could be spun to play people who are not red team.

Hypotheticals defended with hypotheticals