Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
timschochet

The Wall: UPDATE- 16 states sue Trump over National Emergency Declaration

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Of course we have. If we catch them when they’re trying to do it we stop them. 

 

12 minutes ago, Apple Jack said:

There is no "solution." People break the law. Welcome to planet Earth.

By this reasoning, we shouldn't have walls around banks, or at the airport. Why are Americans subjected to rules of order, but we don't expect the same from immigrants entering this country?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

Sorry, I was busy yesterday - Lindsay Graham went to Turkey?

Pelosi can’t go speak to our troops but we sent Graham to Turkey? Land of bone saws and journalist murder?

Do you know what people in Turkey call Turkeys?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

Sorry, I was busy yesterday - Lindsay Graham went to Turkey?

Pelosi can’t go speak to our troops but we sent Graham to Turkey? Land of bone saws and journalist murder?

We can blame Turkey for many things, but not this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Future Champs said:

We can blame Turkey for many things, but not this.

Oh, not for the murder, I’m just saying what the heck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, timschochet said:

Of course. How much money should we spend to enforce laws against jaywalking? Billions? Should it a priority issue for law enforcement? 

Jaywalking law is not only to protect the walker.  I cannot imagine how much worse traffic would be in Manhattan if everyone jaywalks.  You are right though that it exists because it is human nature to be selfish.

Edited by bradyfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, KCitons said:

 

By this reasoning, we shouldn't have walls around banks, or at the airport. Why are Americans subjected to rules of order, but we don't expect the same from immigrants entering this country?

We do expect immigrants to do this exact thing. Most sane people see a pretty big difference between building a wall around a vault (it's just a building you know) and trying to build a giant wall across the entire southern border. Not to mention ignoring the entire northern border, or the thousands of miles of unwalled coastline.

Being against an unrealistic wall does not mean being against secure borders. You know that, but continue to come.uo with ridiculous analogies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

Lindsay Graham?

Hindi, just like they call the country of India. Not related to anything, I just thought that was neat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, KCitons said:

 

By this reasoning, we shouldn't have walls around banks, or at the airport. Why are Americans subjected to rules of order, but we don't expect the same from immigrants entering this country?

Social Democrats would love it if the banks do not put locks on their doors.  Anyone needs money, just check which bank has some left to take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

Sorry, I was busy yesterday - Lindsay Graham went to Turkey?

Pelosi can’t go speak to our troops but we sent Graham to Turkey? Land of bone saws and journalist murder?

That's so last year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$10b more for border security over a 10 year span including extended pedestrian fencing, immigration judges, BPA, updated tech at ports of entry...

For...

A path to citizenship for all persons eligible for DACA today and ending all separation of families forever.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, the moops said:

We do expect immigrants to do this exact thing. Most sane people see a pretty big difference between building a wall around a vault (it's just a building you know) and trying to build a giant wall across the entire southern border. Not to mention ignoring the entire northern border, or the thousands of miles of unwalled coastline.

Being against an unrealistic wall does not mean being against secure borders. You know that, but continue to come.uo with ridiculous analogies. 

Also, while the bank should have walls of its own, I don’t think we should build a wall around our banks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, the moops said:

We do expect immigrants to do this exact thing. Most sane people see a pretty big difference between building a wall around a vault (it's just a building you know) and trying to build a giant wall across the entire southern border. Not to mention ignoring the entire northern border, or the thousands of miles of unwalled coastline.

Being against an unrealistic wall does not mean being against secure borders. You know that, but continue to come.uo with ridiculous analogies. 

Passive aggressive comment.

You glossed over airports. As Henry pointed out, banks are privately owned. But, what about buildings that are maintained by taxpayer dollars?

I already mentioned that I am not stuck on it needing to be a wall. I am of the opinion that all options should be on the table to ensure that immigrants enter this country legally. It's an interesting dynamic on this board that people want all guns or cars, or whatever, to be registered and documented. But, when it comes to immigrants, we are happy to let them walk around without the same documentation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, The Z Machine said:

$10b more for border security over a 10 year span including extended pedestrian fencing, immigration judges, BPA, updated tech at ports of entry...

For...

A path to citizenship for all persons eligible for DACA today and ending all separation of families forever.

The real argument all along is not so much about the people who are already here but people who want to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, bradyfan said:

The real argument all along is not so much about the people who are already here but people who want to come.

So, if you're Trump do you take this deal to reopen the government?  Even if it doesn't address the undocumented (other than DACA) that are currently here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, bradyfan said:

The real argument all along is not so much about the people who are already here but people who want to come.

There's no argument about what to do with the people here? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Z Machine said:

So, if you're Trump do you take this deal to reopen the government?  Even if it doesn't address the undocumented (other than DACA) that are currently here.

Did you take a look at what Trump proposed in January, 2018?  The one that was hated by both sides?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, bradyfan said:

Social Democrats would love it if the banks do not put locks on their doors.  Anyone needs money, just check which bank has some left to take.

People trying to come here for a better life and people robbing banks seems like a pretty bad analogy to draw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bradyfan said:

Not the sticky point.

It's likely going to be the main bargaining issues in the eventual compromise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The General said:

People trying to come here for a better life and people robbing banks seems like a pretty bad analogy to draw.

It is not robbery when you can simply walk in and take what you need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The General said:

It's likely going to be the main bargaining issues in the eventual compromise.

Part of the package but not the sticky point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bradyfan said:

It is not robbery when you can simply walk in and take what you need.

I'm saying comparing bank robbers to some family walking a thousand miles to try to come into our country is kind of gross.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bradyfan said:

Part of the package but not the sticky point.

You can keep saying this but Trump turned down 25 billion for a wall or whatever Trump didn't even have to waffle on calling it steel slat curtain or whatever nonsense he uses now. Republicans and Dems agreed on this deal.

He said no because it came with DACA.

That seems like a sticky point.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was told points are sticky when you get french benefits.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Snorkelson said:

In what prior administration has the senate majority leader simply not allowed a vote so the president can get his way? This isn’t how it’s supposed to function, neither is what McConnell did in the Merrill garland nomination. This is on McConnell and trump. Have the vote on the bill the house sent through that the senate unanimously voted for in December. If trump wants to veto it that’s his prerogative. Then congress can vote to override- none of which is a given. Instead of negotiating with elected representatives from each area they have to negotiate with one person, the president, who leaves if he doesn’t get what he wants. 

This is ENTIRELY the Republicans doing, not both sides. 

This statement cannot be further from the truth.

The current situation is a blood feud. Which side provoked the latest incident is completely irrelevant to overall blame. Each new incident is unprecedented in its scope and scale which just perpetuates and escalates the feud. 

There is no question Trump is to blame for starting the shutdown...and the Democrats were absolutely right to wait it out until Trump made the first concession.

But at that point Schumer and Pelosi had a choice...a) take a first step to defuse the blood feud by subordinating their political agenda to the greater needs of the country or b) escalate the situation and attempt to seize the opportunity for max political gain to the detriment of the country.

The Democrats chose b)....and therefore from this point forward are equal parties to the fiasco.

One side provokes, the other escalates. 

 

 

 

Edited by PhantomJB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mile High said:

And how does giving 5.7 billion towards the building of around 150 miles of wall solve anything?

you have to ask yourself if the 600 miles we have right now makes any difference - if you seriously think border barriers make no difference then yes, I can see being against additional

however, everyone knows border barriers ARE an important part of border security. Walls and barriers are literally everywhere in the USA and globally - so to think walls do nothing isn't reasonable or logical

they're not a stop all - but they DO make a difference and aid in border security .... so would 150 more miles strategically placed at places help? Sure .... would it stop all the border issues? No, but it'd help certainly

Democrats have said this for years, they're not wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bradyfan said:

Social Democrats would love it if the banks do not put locks on their doors.  Anyone needs money, just check which bank has some left to take.

What about anti-social Democrats?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Dems should have  jumped at Trump's proposal yesterday.

Let's break it down--the wall isn't going to be built anywhere near to what Trump is proposing and even if started with this money, it isn't even a drop of what is needed to build a massive idea like this. You control the  future purse strings, so seems like a no-brainer there.

The protections offered for the Dreamers would basically make sure they would be in this country indefinitely because i think it is safe to assume (unless the Dems completely screw this up) they will retake the WH in 2020.  

The Democrats get to say to the government workers, "Hey we have your back--look what we did." 

Further, they get to say how important homeland security is to them and that is why they made the deal.

The bottom line, yeah Trump gets to crow about making a deal, but the Democrats come out looking better in the above scenario. 

I think on the flip side by denying it, the Dems run the real risk of Trump stealing the narrative on this and they come out looking equally petty.  I mean, if you are a Dreamer how do you feel today?  You were given an opportunity to not have to  look over your shoulder anymore and the party you support just said no, to score political points. I know..I know people will come back and say Trump caused them to be this way, but looking at it in a narrow scope, this problem could have been solved with a simple yes by the Democrats. I think Trump was counting on them to say no, and I think he would have literally pooped his pants had they gone along with it. 

If it is true what some of the polls show that a majority blame Trump for this shutdown, it will be interesting to see if there is movement in those polls as far as blame.  Some of the headlines I am seeing in the media are reading Trump extends Dreamers a deal in exchange for the wall funding. That's pretty favorable press for him compared to what he normally gets and it allows a subtle shift on the blame for this shutdown. Again people will still blame Trump, but does that start to become people blame both equally?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, PhantomJB said:

But at that point Schumer and Pelosi had a choice...a) take a first step to defuse the blood feud by subordinating their political agenda to the greater needs of the country or b) escalate the situation and attempt to seize the opportunity for max political gain to the detriment of the country.

The Democrats chose a)....and therefore from this point forward are equal parties to the fiasco.

You should check your logic here

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Courtjester said:

I think the Dems should have  jumped at Trump's proposal yesterday.

Let's break it down--the wall isn't going to be built anywhere near to what Trump is proposing and even if started with this money, it isn't even a drop of what is needed to build a massive idea like this. You control the  future purse strings, so seems like a no-brainer there.

The protections offered for the Dreamers would basically make sure they would be in this country indefinitely because i think it is safe to assume (unless the Dems completely screw this up) they will retake the WH in 2020.  

The Democrats get to say to the government workers, "Hey we have your back--look what we did." 

Further, they get to say how important homeland security is to them and that is why they made the deal.

The bottom line, yeah Trump gets to crow about making a deal, but the Democrats come out looking better in the above scenario. 

I think on the flip side by denying it, the Dems run the real risk of Trump stealing the narrative on this and they come out looking equally petty.  I mean, if you are a Dreamer how do you feel today?  You were given an opportunity to not have to  look over your shoulder anymore and the party you support just said no, to score political points. I know..I know people will come back and say Trump caused them to be this way, but looking at it in a narrow scope, this problem could have been solved with a simple yes by the Democrats. I think Trump was counting on them to say no, and I think he would have literally pooped his pants had they gone along with it. 

If it is true what some of the polls show that a majority blame Trump for this shutdown, it will be interesting to see if there is movement in those polls as far as blame.  Some of the headlines I am seeing in the media are reading Trump extends Dreamers a deal in exchange for the wall funding. That's pretty favorable press for him compared to what he normally gets and it allows a subtle shift on the blame for this shutdown. Again people will still blame Trump, but does that start to become people blame both equally?

 

He at least is inching away from the corner he backed himself in. Not nearly enough compromise however. 

The Dems need to present an equally bad offer if this is all it takes for people to be convinced that this is how you negotiate.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, PhantomJB said:

Maybe you could intelligently show me how it's faulty.

Trump's 'concession' is a three year haitus on DACA, a crisis that he created himself when he took office. If he makes it permanent, it might begin discussions. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Car dealer: This car costs 50k. 

Trump: I’ll give you 5. Final offer. 

Car dealer: Pass

MAGA guy: Well he tried, they are being so unreasonable.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, PhantomJB said:
17 minutes ago, msommer said:

You should check your logic here

Maybe you could intelligently show me how it's faulty.

He might just be referring to your typo (writing ‘a’ instead of ‘b’ in the last paragraph). But there’s also a potential problem with your logic: assuming that your a) (giving in) is better for the country than your b) (standing up for what they believe is right) seems like begging the important question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Courtjester said:

I think the Dems should have  jumped at Trump's proposal yesterday.

Let's break it down--the wall isn't going to be built anywhere near to what Trump is proposing and even if started with this money, it isn't even a drop of what is needed to build a massive idea like this. You control the  future purse strings, so seems like a no-brainer there.

The protections offered for the Dreamers would basically make sure they would be in this country indefinitely because i think it is safe to assume (unless the Dems completely screw this up) they will retake the WH in 2020.  

The Democrats get to say to the government workers, "Hey we have your back--look what we did." 

Further, they get to say how important homeland security is to them and that is why they made the deal.

The bottom line, yeah Trump gets to crow about making a deal, but the Democrats come out looking better in the above scenario. 

I think on the flip side by denying it, the Dems run the real risk of Trump stealing the narrative on this and they come out looking equally petty.  I mean, if you are a Dreamer how do you feel today?  You were given an opportunity to not have to  look over your shoulder anymore and the party you support just said no, to score political points. I know..I know people will come back and say Trump caused them to be this way, but looking at it in a narrow scope, this problem could have been solved with a simple yes by the Democrats. I think Trump was counting on them to say no, and I think he would have literally pooped his pants had they gone along with it. 

If it is true what some of the polls show that a majority blame Trump for this shutdown, it will be interesting to see if there is movement in those polls as far as blame.  Some of the headlines I am seeing in the media are reading Trump extends Dreamers a deal in exchange for the wall funding. That's pretty favorable press for him compared to what he normally gets and it allows a subtle shift on the blame for this shutdown. Again people will still blame Trump, but does that start to become people blame both equally?

 

The 3 years don't really add anything.The courts are protecting them now. That’s not much of a give, because someone renewing their daca status today would likely get awork permit into mid- to late 2021.” 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

He might just be referring to your typo (writing ‘a’ instead of ‘b’ in the last paragraph). But there’s also a potential problem with your logic: assuming that your a) is better for the country than your b) seems like begging the question.

Please explain why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump's offer also doesn't actually give up anything.  Dems have already won that through the courts and rejected better offers.  Given that they're currently winning the electoral, policy and PR battle, there's certainly no pressure to backtrack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PhantomJB said:
6 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

He might just be referring to your typo (writing ‘a’ instead of ‘b’ in the last paragraph). But there’s also a potential problem with your logic: assuming that your a) is better for the country than your b) seems like begging the question.

 Please explain why?

Because it’s not at all obvious that capitulating on this point rather than standing up for what they think is right is better for the country. The point should be argued for, not merely assumed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, JuniorNB said:

Trump's 'concession' is a three year haitus on DACA, a crisis that he created himself when he took office. If he makes it permanent, it might begin discussions. 

IMO then the Dems should then match the faux concession with their own faux concession. See where that goes. Complete rejection fans the flames and continues to polarize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Because it’s not at all obvious that capitulating on this point rather than standing up for what they think is right is better for the country. The point should be argued for, not merely assumed.

I wouldn't advocate complete capitulation. I'm arguing against complete obstinance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

Trump's offer also doesn't actually give up anything.  Dems have already won that through the courts and rejected better offers.  Given that they're currently winning the electoral, policy and PR battle, there's certainly no pressure to backtrack.

Exactly.  He isn't giving up anything.  Dreamers are already protected by the courts and most should be safe by their work permits until after 2020 elections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, The General said:

Car dealer: This car costs 50k. 

Trump: I’ll give you 5. Final offer. 

Car dealer: Pass

MAGA guy: Well he tried, they are being so unreasonable.

" The Art of the Deal"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone here really believe that Dems would negotiate with Trump if he agreed to open the government first?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The General said:

This is not a “monster problem”. Crossings have dropped to historic lows. 75% since 2000.. How did that happen?  

This is a Trump and AM radio nutsjobs like Rush problem.

Republicans wanted no part of this in reality. Why did they wait 2 years to fund this crap? Donald waited until he couldn’t do anything about it except shut down the government to make it a crisis.

Pure political trash. 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/11/us/politics/trump-border-crisis-reality.html
 

Quote

 

Undetected illegal border crossings have dropped at an even faster rate, from 851,000 in 2006 to approximately 62,000 in 2016, according to estimates by the Department of Homeland Security.

However, there is one group of migrants that is on the rise: families. A record number of families have tried to cross the border in recent months, overwhelming officials at the border and creating a new kind of humanitarian crisis.


 

can we agree to the above ?

now other numbers - drops from 1.5 million illegally crossing to 500,000 illegally crossing is a big drop - but 500,000 is a LOT of people isn't it ? The drugs - still a lot of drugs, ANY human trafficking should be stopped

there should ideally be ZERO illegally here people and ZERO people crossing out border illegally - that's what secure borders are and while there will always be a few people illegally intent on breaching country borders, what the USA deals with is just crazy and it needs stopped

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jamny said:

Does anyone here really believe that Dems would negotiate with Trump if he agreed to open the government first?

I could see that large group of the Dems would probably feel less inclined to give him anything in these negotiations.

Perhaps he would gain leverage in the court of public opinion if he agreed to open and the Dems refused to give anything.

Who knows?

As it is now he caused the shutdown so it’s on him to figure out the best way to open it back up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, jamny said:

Does anyone here really believe that Dems would negotiate with Trump if he agreed to open the government first?

You do realize that the above statement completely undercuts the "both sides are to blame for the shutdown" talking point, right?

Edited by [scooter]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/11/us/politics/trump-border-crisis-reality.html
 

can we agree to the above ?

now other numbers - drops from 1.5 million illegally crossing to 500,000 illegally crossing is a big drop - but 500,000 is a LOT of people isn't it ? The drugs - still a lot of drugs, ANY human trafficking should be stopped

there should ideally be ZERO illegally here people and ZERO people crossing out border illegally - that's what secure borders are and while there will always be a few people illegally intent on breaching country borders, what the USA deals with is just crazy and it needs stopped

There are lots of things that I’d like to see ZERO of. 

We disagree about the best way to achieve a safe border. It’s complicated, there are no ZERO solutions, much less one that people agree on. That’s without the politics of a loudmouth, simpleton like Trump wrecking everything. 

This is all about how things get done now and it’s not the Dems deal to get Trump’s agenda done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.