The Money Mustache Community
Other => Off Topic => Topic started by: chasesfish on January 24, 2019, 01:47:54 PM
-
I just needed to rant how stupid this is.
The president signs bills, doesn't originate them. The president states what he/she wants, then either gets a bill with that in it or can exercise veto powers. The lack of reporting on this part is insanity.
We already have a "nut job in the white house" rule - Its called 2/3rds vote for a veto override, or just send a 2/3rd vote bill and they have no choice.
Politicians on both sides of congress are still playing charades instead of coming up with a plan that gets 2/3rds votes. Call your representative in the house and both of your senators and remind them that they are in control of this.
-
The bill that the house passed had already passed 100 to 0 in the Senate. This is not up the lto either party to fix. This is up to the GOP senators to either force McConnell to allow a vote or remove him from his position. He is why the Senate is not voting on this bill.
Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk
-
Two senate bills were voted on. One with border wall funding, one without. Both failed.
-
Two senate bills were voted on. One with border wall funding, one without. Both failed.
What was the point of putting up bills that would fail? Neither side has 60 votes. Some ground has to be given.
Republican bill vote was 50-47, Democrats bill vote count was 52-44. Six republicans voted for the Dems bill - Johnny Isakson, Mitt Romney, Lamar Alexander, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski and Cory Gardner.
Perhaps start there and *try* to figure out where there is common ground.
-
In this case the "democratic" bill that failed today is virtually identical to the one that previously got 100% support in the Senate. So ~48 senators who previously voted for it voted against it today, basically because Trump asked them to.
It doesn't matter that the republican-controlled senate worked out a compromise budget that got unanimous support, or that those same people could overrule Trump's veto with only 66 senators. Mitch McConnell won't let that happen.
I suspect some of them are terrified of crossing Trump. They liked the proposal until Trump said he didn't, and they worry about being primaried if they don't kiss Trump's ring at every opportunity. So they changed their votes to reflect what Trump wants, instead of what they want.
The great irony of this situation is that the "democratic" bill that was voted on today is basically identical to the "republican" budget that passed the last Congress unanimously. How fucked up is our country that Senate republicans literally voted against their own budget plan, just because it's now being pushed by democrats.
-
In this case the "democratic" bill that failed today is virtually identical to the one that previously got 100% support in the Senate. So ~48 senators who previously voted for it voted against it today, basically because Trump asked them to.
It doesn't matter that the republican-controlled senate worked out a compromise budget that got unanimous support, or that those same people could overrule Trump's veto with only 66 senators. Mitch McConnell won't let that happen.
I suspect some of them are terrified of crossing Trump. They liked the proposal until Trump said he didn't, and they worry about being primaried if they don't kiss Trump's ring at every opportunity. So they changed their votes to reflect what Trump wants, instead of what they want.
The great irony of this situation is that the "democratic" bill that was voted on today is basically identical to the "republican" budget that passed the last Congress unanimously. How fucked up is our country that Senate republicans literally voted against their own budget plan, just because it's now being pushed by democrats.
Said bill didn't get 2/3rds vote in the house, which is required to override a veto.
I swear we're watching the cognitive decline of old people live: Donald, Mitch, and Nancy. We have to stop electing people who's brains don't fully function
-
It's not just stupid but it is wasting huge amounts of money, hurting our economy, making our country less secure, increasing human suffering. What do us citizens need to do to make our elected representatives DO THEIR JOB?
-
What do us citizens need to do to make our elected representatives DO THEIR JOB?
Vote Republicans out of office at every chance.
-
What do us citizens need to do to make our elected representatives DO THEIR JOB?
Vote Republicans out of office at every chance.
And what magic party do you recommend? Or is it just anyone other than a republican?
I have yet to find a political party that does not have a bunch of self serving corrupt politicians.
Maybe we should judge each politician individually and vote for the person that is best for the job and the future of our country instead of voting based on political party?
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
-
What do us citizens need to do to make our elected representatives DO THEIR JOB?
Vote Republicans out of office at every chance.
And what magic party do you recommend? Or is it just anyone other than a republican?
I have yet to find a political party that does not have a bunch of self serving corrupt politicians.
Maybe we should judge each politician individually and vote for the person that is best for the job and the future of our country instead of voting based on political party?
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Voting for an individual only makes sense if the politician acts as an individual.
The Republican party decided that Donald Trump was the best person for the job of president and future of the US when they made him their leader. The Republican party has followed lock step with every command and decree that he has made, including the current entirely Republican caused government shutdown.
The Democratic party certainly has their problems . . . but at the moment, if you want a functioning government it is unreasonable to vote Republican.
-
What do us citizens need to do to make our elected representatives DO THEIR JOB?
Vote Republicans out of office at every chance.
And what magic party do you recommend? Or is it just anyone other than a republican?
I have yet to find a political party that does not have a bunch of self serving corrupt politicians.
Maybe we should judge each politician individually and vote for the person that is best for the job and the future of our country instead of voting based on political party?
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Voting for an individual only makes sense if the politician acts as an individual.
The Republican party decided that Donald Trump was the best person for the job of president and future of the US when they made him their leader. The Republican party has followed lock step with every command and decree that he has made, including the current entirely Republican caused government shutdown.
The Democratic party certainly has their problems . . . but at the moment, if you want a functioning government it is unreasonable to vote Republican.
Indeed. Only a few Republican Senators have criticized McConnell's stranglehold on the floor. The GOP could get together and persuade McConnell to pass a veto-proof compromise bill (or even elect a new Senate Majority Leader) but they haven't. Instead, we have the Senate majority actively being beholden to the President.
Trump said on TV, right to Pelosi and Schumer, that he'd own the shutdown. The polls agree -- he is to blame.
-
Indeed. Only a few Republican Senators have criticized McConnell's stranglehold on the floor. The GOP could get together and persuade McConnell to pass a veto-proof compromise bill (or even elect a new Senate Majority Leader) but they haven't. Instead, we have the Senate majority actively being beholden to the President.
Trump said on TV, right to Pelosi and Schumer, that he'd own the shutdown. The polls agree -- he is to blame.
Most of the Republican Senators come from states that still had positive approval ratings for Trump as of last month (https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-approval-rating-by-state-map-december-2018-2019-1). Colorado's Republican Senator is the only one from a state that did not vote for Trump in 2016; but, 12 other senators represent states (AZ, FL x 2, GA x 2, IA x 2, ME, NC x 2, OH, PA) that currently have a negative approval rating for the president. There are another 17 Republican Senators representing states (IN x 2, KS x 2, MD x 2, MT, ND x 2, NE x 2, SC x 2, TX x x, UT x 2) with single digit approval ratings for Trump - ratings that I assume are declining as the shutdown continues. We'll only see an end of the stalemate when these 30 Republican Senators realize that leadership that walks in lockstep with Trump is not in the party's best interest.
-
The thread has digressed to "who's to blame".
2/3rds vote or 50% plus 60% and a White House signature resolves this.
House and Senate haven't simultaneously passed something the President would sign, nor have they come to the 2/3rds super-majority to override the veto.
Congress has the power if they choose to negotiate. The reasons for not negotiated are deep rooted and each party shares responsibility for why we're here.
The White House also has the worse PR team in the history of shutdowns. Congress almost always cracks
-
The thread has digressed to "who's to blame".
2/3rds vote or 50% plus 60% and a White House signature resolves this.
House and Senate haven't simultaneously passed something the President would sign, nor have they come to the 2/3rds super-majority to override the veto.
Congress has the power if they choose to negotiate. The reasons for not negotiated are deep rooted and each party shares responsibility for why we're here.
The White House also has the worse PR team in the history of shutdowns. Congress almost always cracks
Well, Trump just caved. He owned the shutdown. And it was incredibly stupid, as the title of this thread says. His stupid decision, and now he has had to own the consequences of his stupidity. What a great negotiator!
-
The thread has digressed to "who's to blame".
2/3rds vote or 50% plus 60% and a White House signature resolves this.
House and Senate haven't simultaneously passed something the President would sign, nor have they come to the 2/3rds super-majority to override the veto.
Congress has the power if they choose to negotiate. The reasons for not negotiated are deep rooted and each party shares responsibility for why we're here.
The White House also has the worse PR team in the history of shutdowns. Congress almost always cracks
Well, Trump just caved. He owned the shutdown. And it was incredibly stupid, as the title of this thread says. His stupid decision, and now he has had to own the consequences of his stupidity. What a great negotiator!
It's good that the Republican entirely to blame for the shutdown has decided to stop the shutdown on a whim. It's disappointing that a whim was all it took to create the problem in the first place.
-
Three weeks, then we get this insanity again.
I'm honestly surprised since the amount of money they were arguing about was such small fractions of the overall federal budget.
btw - I'm pretty libertarian and dislike the statists that exist in both parties. Economic and social freedom appear to be too much to ask
-
What do us citizens need to do to make our elected representatives DO THEIR JOB?
Vote Republicans out of office at every chance.
And what magic party do you recommend? Or is it just anyone other than a republican?
I have yet to find a political party that does not have a bunch of self serving corrupt politicians.
Maybe we should judge each politician individually and vote for the person that is best for the job and the future of our country instead of voting based on political party?
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Voting for an individual only makes sense if the politician acts as an individual.
The Republican party decided that Donald Trump was the best person for the job of president and future of the US when they made him their leader. The Republican party has followed lock step with every command and decree that he has made, including the current entirely Republican caused government shutdown.
The Democratic party certainly has their problems . . . but at the moment, if you want a functioning government it is unreasonable to vote Republican.
I doubt they decided he was the best person for the job and future of the US just that he was the most likely to win of the pool that they had.
Rarely is the best person for the job the one that is put up for election.
The Democrats do the exact same thing they want to stay in power and choose what will politically keep them in power.
Anyhow I understand that in this political climate it is not possible to have a rational discussion with people so driven by partisan agendas.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
-
Three weeks, then we get this insanity again.
I'm honestly surprised since the amount of money they were arguing about was such small fractions of the overall federal budget.
btw - I'm pretty libertarian and dislike the statists that exist in both parties. Economic and social freedom appear to be too much to ask
Hopefully the Republicans will be able to convince Trump he'd be insane to shut the government down again, after the shellacking they have just taken.
-
Air traffic control was beginning to have systematic shutdowns. Would have prevented Trump from flying to Florida. Hence the temporary end to the shutdown.
-
Three weeks, then we get this insanity again.
Right, this all part of the theater. With most of the "deals" that Trump has signed as president, other parties had to negotiate something and then take it to him and convince him it was politically favorable for him to back it. He's generally not been involved in any actual negotiating.
So one interpretation of today's event is that someone, probably republican senators, went to him and explained that he was losing this fight badly, and getting worse by the day, and that stalling while doing nothing was only going to make things even worse. He desperately needed to shake things up somehow, because Nancy Pelosi was grinning ear to ear as Trump's shutdown got worse and worse. So this three week deal imposes a new deadline, and it refocuses blame on the new "bipartisan commission" that is going to negotiate. Now it can be their fault instead of his, and perhaps they convinced him this was the best way to protect himself from the consequences of his bad decisions.
As an added bonus, the announcement to temporarily end the shutdown splits media attention away from Trump's personal involvement as the connection between his campaign and Russia, as the one who personally spoke to Roger Stone about his contacts with Russian military intelligence officers posing as online hackers. Stone's indictment totally discredits Guiliani's defense that only Trump's people colluded, but not Trump, and Trump didn't know about it. Turns out Trump personally colluded, in his talks with Roger Stone.
But a second less charitable interpretation of today's shutdown announcement is that Trump caved way harder than he had to. The democrat's proposal was to reopen government for three weeks in exchange for 12 billion dollars of funding for border security, and he turned it down. Then today he agreed to reopen the government for three weeks in exchange for... absolutely nothing? He could have gotten a better deal than this two weeks ago if he had just agreed to the democrat's proposal in the first place.
I'm eagerly awaiting the savage whipping he'll get from Ann Coulter and the rest of the alt-right media.
-
The only bright side I see in all this, is that Trump is less likely to view a shutdown as a way to get what he wants in the future. This isn't to say that he won't try again, just that he won't use it reflexively (I hope).
-
Then today he agreed to reopen the government for three weeks in exchange for... absolutely nothing?
I assume he gets to give his SOTU speech now! :)
-
I hope the federal workers take the next few weeks to stock up on canned goods, because come Feb. 15th this is going to start all over again.
-
I hope the federal workers take the next few weeks to stock up on canned goods, because come Feb. 15th this is going to start all over again.
Yes. And apparently, #TrumpGOPshutdown part 2 will include a declaration of a state of emergency, as per Trump himself this afternoon: Trump says he will declare an emergency if he doesn't reach a border deal (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-shutdown-trump-emergency/trump-says-he-will-declare-an-emergency-if-he-doesnt-reach-a-border-deal-idUSKCN1PJ2GL?il=0)
-
What do us citizens need to do to make our elected representatives DO THEIR JOB?
Vote Republicans out of office at every chance.
And what magic party do you recommend? Or is it just anyone other than a republican?
I have yet to find a political party that does not have a bunch of self serving corrupt politicians.
Maybe we should judge each politician individually and vote for the person that is best for the job and the future of our country instead of voting based on political party?
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Based on the insane level of corruption surrounding all Republican administrations going back to Nixon, avoiding people with an “R” after their name is not exactly a terrible approach.
-
I know this is petty, but I laughed out loud. I thought maybe y'all could enjoy the humor to start your weekend.
-
I hope the federal workers take the next few weeks to stock up on canned goods, because come Feb. 15th this is going to start all over again.
Yes. And apparently, #TrumpGOPshutdown part 2 will include a declaration of a state of emergency, as per Trump himself this afternoon: Trump says he will declare an emergency if he doesn't reach a border deal (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-shutdown-trump-emergency/trump-says-he-will-declare-an-emergency-if-he-doesnt-reach-a-border-deal-idUSKCN1PJ2GL?il=0)
An "emergency" would be in the courts until next year. Kavanuagh would support it but I'm not convinced that Roberts would.
It would, of course, give Trump an escape and feed his base.
-
The meme game is solid right now in some social media forums.
I agree about this political environment (and really the environment post Clinton) has not been one for debates, we've drifted more and more partisan as party primaries decide a majority of the political offices. There are some wild momentum areas (like suburban traditionally republican districts just abandoning Republicans big this midterm).
I worry about the economically radical factions taking over the democrats as much as the socially radical republicans dominating the right. My biggest fear of all are statists, those who want to use the government for more control over people and businesses's lives. Tariffs are a statist acts to benefit one business at the expense of others. Some of the recent "high income/high wealth" tax proposals are meant to punishing high achievers for the purpose of punishment instead of the purpose of optimally funding the government.
That's also a statist act.
I'm pretty moderate, but will always be wary about the power granted to the state. They are the only authority that can legally show up at your house with a gun and take you and or your assets for non-compliance.
-
The word from my former federal colleagues back in the office is that very little is getting done during this three week window that the government has been temporarily reopened. Everyone expects to be stuck at home again in two more weeks.
For the first few days back at work, it sounds like lower level people were crazy busy running around fixing broken stuff, and upper level people were stuck in meetings trying to figure out how to salvage big projects. Timelines are blown, so deadlines are going to get missed. They need to figure out how they're going to complete work that will now need to be extended beyond the end of the fiscal year, with funding that expires at the end of the fiscal year and isn't being renewed. There's some inertia involved in getting big groups of people spun back up into cooperative production, so there was apparently a lot of time devoted to assessing the status of group efforts and identifying how to get everyone started again, even if it's only for a three weeks. Where were we again?
The worst job on the first day back was apparently the IT people. After 35 days of furlough, everyone's passwords had expired and all of the office computers were beyond their required security update and patching deadlines. So for that first few hours, half of the office couldn't even log on to their computers. It sounds like folks were grumpy.
And now it's looking more and more like they'll get to do all of this again, starting February 15th.
-
The worst job on the first day back was apparently the IT people. After 35 days of furlough, everyone's passwords had expired and all of the office computers were beyond their required security update and patching deadlines. So for that first few hours, half of the office couldn't even log on to their computers. It sounds like folks were grumpy.
Yeah, that part had to have been rough. I saw from some chatter on /r/sysadmin that some places got about 4 hours notice that they needed to shut down EVERYTHING. I know where I work it wouldn't be a huge deal to bring down the servers with that kind of notice, but plenty of places have all kinds of insane configurations where that would a total disaster (and messy coming back up).
-
I heard the same thing from my friends in the Federal Government, said the IT help desk was the most f-ed up and since they returned to work right at the end of a pay period, everyone was trying to do time sheets at the same time.
I'm attempting to take in a lower information diet, the insanity from both sides can cause my mind to go overactive on shit I can't control
-
The worst job on the first day back was apparently the IT people. After 35 days of furlough, everyone's passwords had expired and all of the office computers were beyond their required security update and patching deadlines. So for that first few hours, half of the office couldn't even log on to their computers. It sounds like folks were grumpy.
Especially great since NIST password guidelines removed the recommendation to periodically change passwords in 2016.
-
The worst job on the first day back was apparently the IT people. After 35 days of furlough, everyone's passwords had expired and all of the office computers were beyond their required security update and patching deadlines. So for that first few hours, half of the office couldn't even log on to their computers. It sounds like folks were grumpy.
Especially great since NIST password guidelines removed the recommendation to periodically change passwords in 2016.
Well, at least all the password changes are on the same schedule now!
-
The worst job on the first day back was apparently the IT people. After 35 days of furlough, everyone's passwords had expired and all of the office computers were beyond their required security update and patching deadlines. So for that first few hours, half of the office couldn't even log on to their computers. It sounds like folks were grumpy.
Especially great since NIST password guidelines removed the recommendation to periodically change passwords in 2016.
Well, at least all the password changes are on the same schedule now!
Yeah, and they'll all be expired again after the next shutdown!
-
Well, at least all the password changes are on the same schedule now!
Hardly. With reset schedules covering the whole range between three weeks and six months, they never stayed synced for very long.
-
In today's government shutdown news, congress has apparently negotiated a deal to keep the government open and Trump is signalling he will sign it.
The deal apparently funds all parts of the government for the remainder of the year, includes 1.37billion dollars for border fencing, and does just about nothing else. No change to the number of detention beds. No fix for immigration courts or visa programs or ICE or refugees, nada. Just 1.37b for a wall, in exchange for not holding government employees hostage again.
Notably, this offer is approximately $200million LESS than democrats offered before the first shut down. Trump refused that offer and asked for a 35 day shutdown, eventually caved, and then to avoid a repeat he managed to negotiate himself a lower offer than he had to begin with, before all the shenanigans. He's a real deal-maker, all right.
He drove himself a hard bargain this time around. It's been a pleasure doing business with you Mr. Trump, let's do it again soon.
-
In today's government shutdown news, congress has apparently negotiated a deal to keep the government open and Trump is signalling he will sign it.
The deal apparently funds all parts of the government for the remainder of the year, includes 1.37billion dollars for border fencing, and does just about nothing else. No change to the number of detention beds. No fix for immigration courts or visa programs or ICE or refugees, nada. Just 1.37b for a wall, in exchange for not holding government employees hostage again.
Notably, this offer is approximately $200million LESS than democrats offered before the first shut down. Trump refused that offer and asked for a 35 day shutdown, eventually caved, and then to avoid a repeat he managed to negotiate himself a lower offer than he had to begin with, before all the shenanigans. He's a real deal-maker, all right.
He drove himself a hard bargain this time around. It's been a pleasure doing business with you Mr. Trump, let's do it again soon.
It seems like democrats at least got some funding reductions out of the deal...
https://www.vox.com/2019/2/12/18220323/immigration-detention-beds-congress-cap