If Democrats decide to stop being "the adult in the room"

I’d say the key point is this bit:

"The entire republican party is currently enabling Donald Trump. We’re currently in the midst of a government shutdown that he promises could go on “months or years” if we do not give him the incredibly stupid wall he wants (which he promised mexico would pay for). This is entirely on Trump and McConnell. Which republicans have stood up and said, “this is not okay and needs to stop”? Which republicans have been willing to actually do something about this mess? Oh, fucking nobody? That’s kind of telling.

Your house is not in order."

I don’t think it’s disputable that the democrats have been acting as the adults in the room. “When they go low, we go high” and whatnot. Meanwhile, the republicans have… not.

There’s a clear line that can be drawn from the tea party revolution of 2010 to the current dysfunction. McConnell’s tenure as senate majority leader is basically a long list of impressive accomplishments born out of shredding political norms, and once he gained power, he realized how impossible it was to use those principles to actually legislate.

Look at 2016-2018. Republicans controlled all three branches of government, and the only significant legislature they passed was a tax cut that had the dubious distinction of being the most unpopular tax cut ever. They also rammed through a SCOTUS justice who has absolutely no business being on the highest court on a near-perfect party line vote. They failed their signature legislative promise of repealing Obamacare, because they never, ever had a realistic plan to “repeal and replace” - merely a base that was fed insane nonsense and didn’t have to consider the upsides of Obamacare until it was almost repealed. Once it became clear what the consequences of “repeal and replace” would be, it quickly became unbelievably unpopular. We have the first ever government shutdown when one party controls all branches of government. Meanwhile, congress has seated a representative who assaulted a reporter and barely avoided seating a goddamn serial child molester.

That’s just the last two years. That’s just the most high-profile issues, barely scratching the surface of what’s going on. That’s just congressional republicans. Which is particularly telling, because it ignores the elephant in the room, which is President Donald Trump. The only republicans in congress who are or were willing to stand up to the president did so in token, meaningless ways, voting his way nearly 100% of the time before quietly retiring (or dying) so that a more pro-trump republican could take their place. And do I have to go over how fucked up that is? I really don’t want to; if you can’t see that the president is a real and present danger by now, then there’s nothing I could say to convince you. But as said, we’re now in day 13 of the second-longest government shutdown ever, brought on because the President refuses to sign any appropriations bills that don’t contain funding for his stupid fucking wall mexico was supposed to pay for, and the senate majority leader refuses to try to override that veto, even though a clean bill is and was available, and passed the senate unanimously. That, and he’s leading what can only be described as a disinformation campaign - or he’s so completely detached from reality that he has no idea what is and is not true. Either one would be terrifying to anyone who cares about the integrity of the office.

Your house. Is not. In Order.

First off, you seem to be unaware of some facts here: “Several House Republicans broke with Trump and voted with Democrats to pass 2 bills that would end the government shutdown”.

But secondly, why should it surprise you or anyone that most Republicans are willing to engage in a bit of brinkmanship to get their policy goals enacted? The Democrats certainly are. Obama didn’t have any issues doing it either.

That is simply a failure to think. Eric Holder: “When they go low, we kick them.”

You’re just ignoring all the pre-2010 dysfunction, and all the shredding of political norms that Harry Reid did.

I"m not sure that listing some of their accomplishments is really the best strategy for making your case that they’re dysfunctional.

Yes, they could have accomplished more. I suspect many Dems feel similar about their time with unified control and the only significant legislative accomplishment being the passage of ObamaCare.

I’m guessing you mean this as more of a metaphor?

So what? We’ve had shutdowns before, and we will again. Both sides engage in brinkmanship. If you think the shutdown is so terrible, then fund the wall and move on. $5B is a pittance in the grand scheme of our current federal budget.

You don’t give a screaming toddler what they want so they’ll shut up and stop crying. That is awful parenting. Giving into Trump’s tantrum by giving him a 5 Billion dollar slush fund is awful governance and only guarantees that he’ll keep throwing tantrums again and again and again.

The Democrats won and now control the House, Trump needs to learn how to deal with that and stop holding his breath or threatening to take his ball and go home. Its time to for him to grow up. He is not a dictator and he doesn’t get what he wants just because he really wants it and he keep screaming about it. People usually learn lesson that by the age of 3 or 4 if they have decent parents.

Would you want your kid behaving this way. If your kid pitched a fit in public and started screaming and wailing because he wants a toy, do you think its a good idea to just give it to him? How do you think that will play the next time he sees a toy he wants?

As an action, or a reaction? :dubious:

Hey, you now recognize it as an accomplishment! Maybe the rest of your party will follow. Not by admitting they were totally wrong, of course, but by claiming credit for it.

It isn’t the wall or the money as such that matters, but (A) What that monstrosity means for what’s left of our national image, and (B) Showing a toddler that tantrums don’t work.

In a universe that ran according to karma, you would find yourself trapped in a small space with a three-year-old who had been raised according to that logic, with absolutely nothing on hand that could be fashioned into hearing protection if you had Angus MacGyver, Montgomery Scott, and a litter of Motie Watchmakers working on it.

If I may try to steer this thread on a track a bit…

Again, not a thread debating about who is the adult in the room and who is the toddler. The thread presumes/assumes that Democrats have been adults and Republicans have been toddlers. I was/am asking - what if the day comes when Democrats decide that they no longer ***want ***to play the role of the adult and they too want to be a tantrum toddler? Then America will be led by 2 tantrum toddlers.

I can’t see that taking the country anywhere except a really ugly direction.

The wall is not a Republican policy goal. It did not exist on any Republican platform until Donald Trump made it a signature campaign promise. Congress failed to agree on funding for a wall while Republicans were in charge. This is what Pelosi meant when she told Trump that “he didn’t have the votes.” She meant he didn’t have the votes of his own frickin’ party. And that was after his $25B became $5B. Because, let’s be honest, 1/5th of a wall is pretty useless, so even if congress caves to his demands now, there’s still going to be more demands later. And $25B is still a made up number because actual estimates are much higher.

That’s what’s so incredibly stupid about the current behavior of Mitch McConnell and congressional Republicans. They’re not supporting their own policy goals, they’re supporting Trump’s nonsensical and racist campaign promise.

Could we just give Trump five billion dollars to go away? It would be a win-win for everyone; we’d be rid of this pustulant stooge and Donald Trump could legitimately claim to be an actual billionaire instead of obscuring the accounting of his supposed wealth. Of course, we’d then have to deal with a President Pence, but at least his agenda is straightforward and we can get on with dealing his apocalyptic dreams without all of this Twitter bullshit about “Wall” and all of the terrorists at the border.

Stranger

Sure. What evidence is there that the democrats are going in that direction? In what universe is Ocasio-Cortez or Tlaib “a tantrum-throwing toddler” in the way that Donald Trump has been re: the wall? Might as well ask “what if the democrats suddenly became nazis”, honestly.

The majority of Democrats don’t seem headed that way yet, but I’ve definitely read a lot of opinions to the effect of “When they go high we go low doesn’t work, we need to fight dirty.”

The whole “five billion” thing is utter bullshit. Sez who, five billion? Anybody seen the plans, the budget, the spreadsheets? Is it five billion for the great big beautiful concrete wall, or five billion for the steel sluts? Slats. Whatever. So, its five billion or so for this year, before any plans have been drawn up, before the property has been confiscated or purchased, before they have even decided what to build it out of!

Its a down payment for this year! Will the final price be fifty billion, a hundred, what? Nobody has any idea. Remember, once you pay the Duncegeld

I mean, what do you expect? “They go low, we go high” has been tried as a strategy and failed in spectacular fashion. Should we keep expecting our better angels to win out, keep counting on a process that does not work with bad faith actors to work this time? Do keep in mind that this is, to date, entirely theoretical, and that many such policy ideas are good in a vacuum (Puerto Rico should have congressional representation at the very least) and/or direct responses to existing abuses (stuffing the courts as a response to Garland is hardly an irrational response).

(Also those opinions have exactly nothing to do with Tlaib and Occasio-Cortez.)

So it seems your worries are somewhat misplaced. Maybe you would be better off worrying about how to convince those who would cause the diversion upthread, who don’t understand that this insanity is not exactly bipartisan.

Those are artistically designed steel sluts, I’ll have you know, ready and willing to be an asylum-seeker’s robot lover. :wink:

At this point, some of us would happily pay Donald Trump $25 billion to go away, if he’d abdicate and leave for some European country with a name beginning in* S*, never to return. The $5 billion isn’t the gripping problem. At this point, a real danger is the wealth destruction from the physical wall itself. We have to stop feeding the false hope that border security will enrich and protect the USA.

Giving in just because $5B is a small amount would legitimize this tactic and ensure that it would be used again and again. That would be a terrible strategic blunder from the Democrats, especially when public opinion still appears to blame Trump and the GOP significantly more than the Democrats (rightfully so, since the Democrats are passing bills funding the government at levels that Republicans in the Senate voted for at the end of '18, and the Senate Republicans are currently doing nothing, as is Trump).

If that was the goal, that ship sailed a long time ago. It’s already a tactic that has been used again and again.

If you just think it’s good politics, then that’s fine, carry on.

The screaming toddler is not getting his toy. Deal with it.

It looks like his new ploy might be trying to pinch money from the military to fund (some of) it. No, not the Mexican military, ha-ha, the American one funded by Americans. We’ll find out tonight if that suspicion is true.

Trump has stated 212 times that Mexico would pay for the wall. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/08/president-trumps-desperate-nonsensical-claim-that-mexico-is-paying-wall/?fbclid=IwAR3IhLkAT40SuR1RTPiR5ohk-g3p9rsxGkV666h7REzOqzDBC5KjfjxKcK4&utm_term=.b1f7d6f255ca

In Jan 18 The Democrats insisted on DACA inclusion the budget; when the Administration said no, they shut it down. Votes being held up over non-related issues goes back a long time - I remember when Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling when he was a senator, because he was against the Iraq war.

But that said, I have a hard time seeing how the shutdown will hurt anyone politically. The last major GOP-driven shutdown was 2013, mostly over Obamacare. Remember what happened in 2014? The GOP absolutely crushed the Dems in the next election, and gained margins not seen in both houses since 1928.

In my opinion, if the Democrats think that they’ll somehow benefit from this shutdown, they are deluding themselves. Given that Schumer, Obama and Hillary all voted for 700 miles of border fencing in 2006, the public understands that their opposition is all politics, about denying Trump a victory (at the cost of making the Feds and contractors suffer).

If 2013 showed us anything, it’s that Americans either like shutdowns, don’t care about shutdowns, or at least, don’t vote based on them.