The shutdown is beginning to hurt a lot of people. Sure doesn’t help that Congress didn’t make a serious attempt to resolve the problem this week.
You can also replace “Congress” with “Republicans”, in the above. Even “Trump” would be an acceptable substitute. 
As we’ve said a thousand times already, Congress had this resolved. Then Trump stepped in. Why should they do anything he won’t approve? What’s the possible sense in that?
Stop dancing around the issue. This is Trump’s shutdown. All the blame goes to him. 100% of it.
He’ll only budge if people like you start facing up to reality. And get in his face about it. He thinks he’s playing to his base. Nothing can change that but his base. Realize that he is a piece of shit who’s been playing you for suckers, stop the chants of “lock her up,” and quit enabling him.
I don’t support Trump.
I just want this mess resolved. All the parties need to come together and figure it out.
Some sort of compromise will have to be found. No one gets everything they want.
They can’t ignore the President. Like it or not he’s a big part of this negotiation. At least until 2020 when hopefully we elect someone else.
No. *Congress *decides the budget, not the president. He is usurping the authority of Congress.
The GOP just has to grow some balls.
Zero compromise with Trump. Zero dollars for the Wall. It’s an unAmerican waste of money.
The new Congress needs to pass the ‘clean’ bill, as it passed the Senate just a little while ago, and dare Trump to veto it.
And keep doing it, either until he signs, or they override.
Do you feel that a complete waste of $5 billion for a blackmail package, to partially pay for a ridiculous wall which is a vanity project for Trump, and which he promised, over and over and over again in his campaign, that he would make Mexico pay for, is acceptable in order to end this stupid shutdown? Because, at this point, Trump is making that sound like a non-negotiable point.
So, appease the tyrant. That’s a great strategy.
Well, the senate and the house are both pretty clear on this - the bill is fine. Trump vetoed it. So there is one specific cause for the shutdown - Trump. Do you support giving him what he wants (even if it’s stupid) to end the shutdown? Yes or no.
Clearly, you underestimate the power of rationalization.
We have no President, just a lying buffoon occupying the spot where a President should be.
I’ve said it before; as a libertarian I’ve not been happy with any president’s policies since I was old enough to pay attention. Up until now now though, I have never had the impression that anyone in that office had not the best of intentions – however misguided – for this country and its people, not even Nixon (may he rot in hell).
And even when someone looked incompetent (I’m looking at you, Carter and Bush II!) it was flashes of incompetence, not continually, coupled with lies, self-aggrandizement, and greed. Donny Two-scoops is the world’s best negotiator? Let him negotiate with the Dems to get his precious wall and Mexico to pay for it. They will most likely go about as well as those negotiations with North Korea over their nuclear aspirations.
The president of Mexico will build the wall with his bare hands before that ever happens, unfortunately.
Just pay the trumpgeld already.
Then it will be over, and he will have no further demands, right?
Actually, the bill that passed the Senate was never brought to the House floor for a vote, was it? The bill the House passed was further amended to include the $5 billion for the wall. If you want to be pedantic, Trump didn’t veto anything, as nothing has reached his desk.
Now, if the House would have passed the bill given to it by the Senate unamended, then it could have been presented to Trump for a veto showdown - and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Senate’s bill is the second thing the House does (the first being Pelosi’s “HR 1” which, among other things, will require all Presidents to make their income tax returns public).
To be fair, there’s no indication that a clean continuing resolution would pass the House, either now or after the third. The bill passed by Ryan et al. contained $5 billion for “border security” and was approved almost strictly on party lines. Trump hasn’t formally vetoed anything, because Congress has taken the tack that Trump WOULD veto it - so they didn’t even try.
Both chambers of Congress AND the Presidency, and Republicans can’t even keep the government running, let alone trains running on time.
At least welfare-queen farmers will see the taxpayer bailout spigot turn off for a bit.
I understand building over a thousand miles of wall will never happen.
Trump ran on border security, it helped get him elected. He’s trying to make good on that promise. That’s to be expected. Every President tries to fulfill their major campaign promises.
The Democrats have an issue that’s equally important to them.
You slash the 5 billion to 2 billion and get a firm commitment from Republican leadership to support the Democrat’s pet issue.
Trump gets a couple hundred miles of wall and his base is satisfied. The Democrats get an issue they care about. That’s how you have to govern in a two party system.
Congress has routinely made deals like this for almost 250 years.
It’s not wasted money. DHS knows where the border is being penetrated. They should focus any new construction on those areas. Two hundred miles isn’t much wall on a huge border.
Ok, here’s the wall deal: Impeach Trump, once he’s gone, the adults will discuss our wall-building needs. Maybe we can get Trump’s asset forfeitures to pay for a tiny little piece of it, which we will duly commemorate for him in lieu of his library.
Trump ran on A Wall. That Mexico was going to pay for. He’s delusional, and neither one of those promises will be delivered.
He did not run on “border security”, he ran on “build a wall!” and promised that Mexico would pay for it. Democrats have offered to be flexible on funding “border security” to the tune of $1.3 billion (as I recall). On top of (again as I recall) in excess of $1 billion already budgeted for that purpose that hasn’t been spent. But not funding for Trump’s vanity wall. A useless boondoggle based on Trumpian over-simplification of complex issues and reinforced by his childish stubbornness doesn’t deserve compromise - or even consideration.
Mick Mulvaney (acting chief of staff) has a good understanding of this issue. His comments in 2015 (opposing Trump) are right on point.
Maybe Mulvaney can negotiate a solution? It won’t be easy. He has to satisfy his temperamental boss and still offer a compromise the Democrats will accept.
At least he understands that Trumps broad vision for a entire wall isn’t obtainable.
It’s probably 50/50 that Mulvaney can get a deal. The next few weeks should be interesting.
No need to lecture me on how this works. If you think this is about only the wall and that these are normal negotiations, you have not been paying attention.
Security and immigration reform are not what he campaigned on. He campaigned on xenophobia. That doesn’t deserve accommodation.