US Government to shut down in less than an hour, would be first single-party shutdown ever

[the_randomizer]

I'm not gonna argue this point a lot because I've gotten tired of arguing it, but I'll say that I disagree that Trump is a master politician looking to manipulate both sides by pissing them off. I think he's just generally got little patience and doesn't understand politics much.

As for the DACA part, I think he just chose to repeal it because his aides told him to, in fact, the reason for the first shutdown (the one that didn't last two hours) was that Republicans Democrats agreed to pay for both the wall and DACA, and Trump was all for it till he changed his mind two days later because Steven Miller told him to not do it. He literally turned down his biggest campaign promise, the wall, because he threw a tantrum

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------


CNN can definitely suck it, but every other cable station is just as bad. They're all just looking for profits and ratings, there are much better news sources than cable news

I tend to avoid cable news, it's too biased in one way or another.

 

[ThisIsDaAccount]

I tend to avoid cable news, it's too biased in one way or another.

Same here

 

[brickmii82]

I actually just spent an hour to watch that entire speech, and I must say that I do believe it was good. I don't stand with Rand Paul on a whole lot of issues, but I appreciate that he's willing to say that all deficits are bad, not just Democrat deficits.

What made me really mad, however, is when he said he didn't care to turn down tax cuts because he thinks they increase liberty. That really frustrated me, because it shows this guy is no deficit hawk, he's just a spending hawk. If you cut taxes by a trillion dollars, then it's gonna take a trillion dollar spending cut to get you back to where you are, and I can guarantee you it's not easy to cut spending by a trillion. Just cutting spending and but also cutting taxes doesn't fix the debt, it leaves if exactly where it is.

Rand Paul mentioned that if we don't fix the debt, there's gonna be a day of reckoning where we all pay for it. That hit really close to home, because I moved to the US because the day of reckoning came for the country I'm from (Argentina). If you're curious about that, take a look at this. The US is in a better position than Argentina was, since the US has its debt in dollars, its own currency (which it doesn't have to convert) and Argentina's spending was even worse because of rampant corruption, with Argentinian politicians actually sending tax money to their own bank accounts, aka stealing it. The US situation isn't nearly as bad, so it's day of reckoning isn't any time soon. Nevertheless it's gonna come, and Rand Paul needs to stop saying "muh tax cuts" and actually pass a tax increase along with spending cuts. We don't need libertarianism, we need austerity.

The main point of the speech imo was that congress needs to do their jobs even if it puts people on the spot or consumes more of their time. Before he made it, he was asking for Amendment debate. His point was that they just laid down a 700 page bill, and no one wanted to talk about what’s in it before voting on it.

As far as taxes, I don’t believe individuals should have to pay more than 25% of their income. Business taxing is a different story. The more national resources a business uses, the more taxes they should pay.

 

[dimmidice]

I tend to avoid cable news, it's too biased in one way or another.

What no foxs news?

 

[Joe88]

As for the DACA part, I think he just chose to repeal it because his aides told him to, in fact, the reason for the first shutdown (the one that didn't last two hours) was that Republicans Democrats agreed to pay for both the wall and DACA, and Trump was all for it till he changed his mind two days later because Steven Miller told him to not do it. He literally turned down his biggest campaign promise, the wall, because he threw a tantrum

Thats not what happened at all, they were meeting during the week for a separate bipartisan immigration reform bill which would included daca, then the shithole thing happened and the whole thing fell apart (insert liberal media fake outrage here)
Then on the day they were going to approve a continuing resolution bill (more kick the can down the road because congress can't do anything) which would have passed with 60 votes, senator schumer wanted to add amnesty for daca recipients into the CR bill, which had 0 chance of passing the house or the congress, there was nothing even on the floor or in the bill about daca to even vote on, trump met with schumer on friday, schumer said he offered 25B or so for wall funding for daca amnesty, but the president never said anything about it, it was just grandstanding and the government shutdown over it.
It should be noted that they don't just want wall funding, they also want to end the visa lottery and chain migration, it was always going to be a separate bill not shoehorned in at the last second into a complety different bill thinking you will sneak one by.

 

[ThisIsDaAccount]

Thats not what happened at all, they were meeting during the week for a separate bipartisan immigration reform bill which would included daca, then the shithole thing happened and the whole thing fell apart (insert liberal media fake outrage here)
Then on the day they were going to approve a continuing resolution bill (more kick the can down the road because congress can't do anything) which would have passed with 60 votes, senator schumer wanted to add amnesty for daca recipients into the CR bill, which had 0 chance of passing the house or the congress, there was nothing even on the floor or in the bill about daca to even vote on, trump met with schumer on friday, schumer said he offered 25B or so for wall funding for daca amnesty, but the president never said anything about it, it was just grandstanding and the government shutdown over it.
It should be noted that they don't just want wall funding, they also want to end the visa lottery and chain migration, it was always going to be a separate bill not shoehorned in at the last second into a complety different bill thinking you will sneak one by.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/21/government-shutdown-immigration-graham-miller-354747

There's an article on trump switching on his position due to his aides, particularly Steven Miller. Just saying, that could have prevented a shutdown altogether.

Also, I haven't found any source on Schumer trying to shoehorn in anything (just to be clear, I'm not calling you a liar, I'm just asking you for a source).

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

The main point of the speech imo was that congress needs to do their jobs even if it puts people on the spot or consumes more of their time. Before he made it, he was asking for Amendment debate. His point was that they just laid down a 700 page bill, and no one wanted to talk about what’s in it before voting on it.

As far as taxes, I don’t believe individuals should have to pay more than 25% of their income. Business taxing is a different story. The more national resources a business uses, the more taxes they should pay.

I understand that, and he's right that people need to do their job. I'm just saying that he shouldn't call himself a deficit hawk if he's not willing to raise taxes. If you cut both spending and taxes, you're usually not helping the debt at all, you should be raising taxes AND cutting spending. If he's only doing the second part, he's not a deficit hawk.

Also, I don't believe that taxes should be more than 25% either, but that's not a valid reason to pass a tax cut under a $20,000,000,000,000 debt. Unless the economy is straight up in danger, the debt needs to go.

 

[Xzi]

Since the discussion has recently focused on DACA, I thought it might be relevant information that the courts decided to fully restore it on the basis that the Trump administration failed to provide sufficient basis for its repeal:

http://amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/13/court-orders-full-restoration-daca-program/

Trump's own comments on these issues again played a role in the decision, much like with the previous Muslim ban repeal.

 

[Joe88]

and like the travel ban it will just go to the SCOTUS and declared legal by judges to actual rule on the law and not feeling or trying to make a political statement, it was put in by executive order than it can be removed by executive order

 

[TotalInsanity4]

and like the travel ban it will just go to the SCOTUS and declared legal by judges to actual rule on the law and not feeling or trying to make a political statement, it was put in by executive order than it can be removed by executive order

Executive orders are regulated by the Supreme Court, we have a system of checks and balances

 

[dpad_5678]

Thank you, PedoCheeto. You're doing a wonderful job......

 

[ThisIsDaAccount]

and like the travel ban it will just go to the SCOTUS and declared legal by judges to actual rule on the law and not feeling or trying to make a political statement, it was put in by executive order than it can be removed by executive order

Seems likely at this point, hopefully by then it'll have been turned into law by Congress.

My opinion:
I'm not a fan of illegal immigration, but it's not the DACA recipients' fault that they were brought into the US illegally. Plus, it's not like they're gonna get full citizenship status, being under DACA just gives you a piece of paper saying "Congrats, next time we see you we won't try to drag you against your will to a country you don't know". It also begins to seem like a good policy when you realize Republican leaders like Paul Ryan told trump not to repeal it.
Honestly, if we get DACA as a full law because of Trump's actions, I'll count this as a positive for his administration even though he'll have largely not done much.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

It also begins to seem like a good policy when you realize Republican leaders like Paul Ryan told trump not to repeal it.

Even though I agree with your overall stance in this case, I pray to God that that isn't the way you judge most pieces of legislation

 

[ThisIsDaAccount]

Even though I agree with your overall stance in this case, I pray to God that that isn't the way you judge most pieces of legislation

I certainly don't, I was just quoting his stance to say that DACA isn't something only Dems want. It's bipartisan and it's got plenty of support from both sides of the aisle. I was just referring to Paul Ryan to represent the Republicsn side.

I disagree with most of his policies tho

 

[Xzi]

and like the travel ban it will just go to the SCOTUS and declared legal by judges to actual rule on the law and not feeling or trying to make a political statement, it was put in by executive order than it can be removed by executive order

The court ruling doesn't deny that the president has the authority to repeal DACA, only that the Trump administration has not provided sufficient reasoning for DACA's repeal.