I heard a good point:. Policy, and actions are easy to compromise on because the end goal is an outcome that is advantageous to your ideology. You don’t have to 100% win to gain an advantageous outcome. However it’s impossible to compromise a symbol because that would be compromising your ideology. Trump’s wall is more a symbol than a policy and he will have a very hard time compromising (even one favoring him) without totally losing face.
The same is arguably true of his opposition. They are symbolically opposed to any such wall, regardless of what their private beliefs may be. Any such climb down from them and their base will crucify them.
Settle in for a long shutdown, I guess.
The opposition is opposed to the symbol not the policy. Border protection is something the Democrats have shown a willingness to compromise over. Heck, the rest of the GOP has shown a willingness to compromise on border security. Trump refuses to compromise his wall, despite it’s obvious shortcomings, and the numerous better border security policies available.
And let’s all remember, Trump publicly and gleefully announced this was HIS shutdown.
I’d say that the wall can easily be compromised on and still be a win. Trump set the stage to scapegoat Dems if it doesn’t happen (I don’t think it will in its entirety). So a loss for a wall still wins at making dems look bad.
I halfway wonder if it isn’t a big red herring. Everybody is talking about wall, no wall, and being willing to sign anything But wall funding. So the more pragmatic part of me says scoop everything on the table and screw the wall.
Given how few supporters the wall actually has, I can’t imagine compromise being anything other than a Dem win.
Imo this is the smart move for sure.
That’s in the vein of "making dems look bad. Frame it like this-“I’m proposing a solution! They’re the ones being disagreeable, causing a prolonged shutdown and letting the bad people in!”.
It’s like a pincer maneuver. Some people that support the wall are one claw, others that don’t like the shutdown are the other claw, the wall is the hinge and oppositional dems are in the squeeze.
Who are you convincing with this message though? The diehard Trumpers who are never voting blue anyways?
Do you actually sway swing voters with such a shitty ruse?
I dunno. I ain’t no political strategiy-ologist.
In recent weeks, so many parents with children have been among the 2,000 unauthorized migrants who are being taken into federal custody each day that authorities have resorted to mass releases of families onto the streets of El Paso and other border cities. U.S. agents are bringing dozens of migrants coughing and feverish each day to clinics and hospitals after stays in jam-packed holding cells where children sleep on concrete floors and huddle in plastic sheets for warmth.
A group of Democratic lawmakers led by the Congressional Hispanic Caucus will travel to New Mexico on Monday to the Border Patrol station where 8-year-old Felipe Alonso Gomez was detained before he died on Christmas Eve with flulike symptoms. But Democrats critical of the administration’s treatment of migrant families have offered few solutions to stem the unprecedented influx of parents with children that is buckling the U.S. immigration system.
I think they should be relocated, via federal busing, to housing centers built in upper-middle class and wealthy areas. Part of the hostility is watching large swathes of rural towns and even southern cities basically come to resemble Mexico. I see it very frequently… Especially driving through old blue color towns. Anywho, maybe spreading out the new arrivals among those who typically don’t live with the results might motivate a meeting of the minds on the subject.
Don’t worry Mexico can pay for that wall as well. Then ones on the coasts.
What if Trump bringing coal back was all about speeding up climate change, melting the ice caps, and flooding large parts of the south/gulf area?
Fallback for the wall is a moat. 4D chess activated.
I agree that capitalism is a thing, and that the media isn’t publicly funded, but they’re not a direct result of what people want to consume. They’re the result of what a small handful of media executives at the head of, what, 4 or 5 media conglomerates think that people want, or think that they can shove down people’s throats. These executives are not actually omniscient.
It becomes common sense in the industry, for example, that people’s attention spans are growing shorter, yet long form conversations in the form of podcasts like Joe Rogan’s (which average 3+ hours) are wildly successful. He averages 150,000,000 downloads, per episode. How many people watch all news media outlets put together? Yet, if he had needed the old gate keepers to green light his podcast it never would have happened.
One of the worst mental viruses of the Trump era is that people insist that you either have to be on team MSM or team Trump. When the reality is that they are both poison, and the MSM spawned the bad Orange man in the first place, and shoved him down everyone’s throats.
People sure have a weird way with rewarding a billion(s) dollar industry when they don’t want to consume it.
They don’t really have to be omniscient. Just close enough. The closer you are the bigger the draw. CNN and Fox are cut from the exact same cloth, they just cater to different subsets.
This is an extreme outlier within that industry. The reality of podcasts (especially long podcasts) is that without rapidly changing material (day to day politics) viewership is abyssmal.
Also, as there exist very very few podcasts of that length/genre (meaning copycats aren’t viable) I’d definitely say it’s more reflective of the personality to see those numbers.
This hasn’t changed since the creation of news though. Brands exist and there could be a variety of reasons the news on the right rejected him.
Let’s give credit where credit is due. Everybody played their part in helping Trump, whether or not they meant to. Nobody, least of all the MSM that spent a year talking about how bad of an idea it was, made anybody push that Trump button in the voting booth.
That uncomfortable moment when US C02 output is lower under Trump than Obama.
I don’t know the numbers and statistics on this…but certainly if true…you aren’t suggesting that it was a result of some initiative instituted by Trump, are you?
I thought the winky face made that clear… should I put a /s after everything I post? Sheesh.
I’m slow, Brother!
But… but… coal is coming back…
HE PROMISED MAH PEOPLE DAMNIT
It sure is. The lucky thing about that: Coal is a bazillion times simpler to export than natural gas. Especially met coal for use in steel making (which we don’t do much of compared to China/India). We’re letting China/India do our polluting for us!
Super greenie Australia is big on this too. They ship almost all of their coal to China and burn very little in Oz.
Judging by the terrifying noises WV miners make in FO76, he shouldn’t cross them.
(I’m sorry, guys…I know this is pretty serious stuff…but when looking at Shumer and Pelosi, I could only think of Herman and Lilly Munster…sorry…!)
Well…Trump and the Dems stated their case…and who stated their case best will ultimately be based on which Tribe you ascribe too…
So I guess we’ll just see what, if anything, happens…